Titles of the Belgian Royal Family 1: Ending Aug.2023

[Mbruno]

To add more confusion to an already confusing thread, I looked up how Prince Lorenz was addressed in Belgian documents before he was made a Prince of Belgium. The goal of this exercise was to figure out how his Austrian titles appeared in Belgian documents.

First, see below an excerpt from the Transition Provisions (Title IX) of the constitution of Belgium itself. The following article has to do with the constitutional amendment that introduced equal primogeniture in the succession to the throne. Since Princess Astrid entered the line of succession after she had already got married to Lorenz, a special provision had to be inserted in the constitution to give retroactive consent to her marriage so that she would not lose her place in the line of succession under the terms of Art. 85.

I. Les dispositions de l’article 85 seront pour la première fois d’application
à la descendance de S.A.R. le Prince Albert, Félix, Humbert, Théodore, Christian,
Eugène, Marie, Prince de Liège, Prince de Belgique, étant entendu que le mariage
de S.A.R. la Princesse Astrid, Joséphine, Charlotte, Fabrizia, Elisabeth, Paola, Marie,
Princesse de Belgique, avec Lorenz, Archiduc d’Autriche-Este, est censé avoir
obtenu le consentement visé à l’article 85, alinéa 2.

Note that Astrid, as a Princess of Belgium, is referred to by the style HRH (S.A.R. in French), but Lorenz is not styled HI&RH.

Next, see an excerpt of King Albert II's royal decree of 10/11/1995 that created Lorenz a Prince of Belgium in his own right. Again, the style HI&RH is not used to refer to Lorenz, with the caveat, however, that, in this particular case, Astrid is not styled HRH either.

Art. 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui le concernent, l'Archiduc Lorenz – Otto – Carl - Amedeus d'Autriche-Este, époux de Notre Fille bien-aimée, la Princesse Astrid – Joséphine – Charlotte – Fabrizia – Elisabeth – Paola - Marie, Princesse de Belgique, sera qualifié Prince de Belgique à la suite des noms et titres qui lui sont propres.

Note also that, in the agenda at the website of the Royal House, Astrid and Lorenz are always styled Their Royal Highnesses (which is their proper style in Belgium), but never Their Imperial & Royal Highnesses. For example:

Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Elisabeth, le Prince Gabriel, le Prince Emmanuel et la Princesse Eléonore, Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Astrid et le Prince Lorenz, Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Claire, le Prince Nicolas et le Prince Aymeric assistent également au concert.

Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Astrid et le Prince Lorenz assistent aux funérailles de S.M. le Roi Michael I de Roumanie. La cérémonie se déroule à Bucarest.

Overall, I don't think there is a legal basis to use the style HI&RH in Anna-Astrid's birth certificate as it was done, probably at the insistence of her parents or, more likely, of her grandparents. She can still be called a princess under Art.4 of the 2015 royal decree as a descendant in direct line of King Léopold I, but she cannot be called a princess of Belgium (which she correctly was not in her birth certificate) or be styled HRH. Her Austrian style of HI&RH, like her father's before here, is probably not recognized in Belgium.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Considering Anna-Astrid a "descendant in direct lineage" of Léopold I is really a stretch too far. Note that Amedeo is born a Habsburg (yes, created Prince of Belgium later in life). Astrid married into the House of Austria-Este and her children are Archdukes and -duchesses of Austria-Este because of their paternal descent.

The complete nobiliary system in Belgium works on paternal descendance. Mathilde, Paola, Fabiola, etc.: all aristocrat ladies because their father, their grandfather, their great-grandfather, etc. did procreate the noble dynasty.

Anna-Astrid is the granddaughter of a Belgian Princess. There are two generations between her and a direct lineage of father on son starting with Léopold I. If we consider her "a direct descendant", boy... where is the end? The many, many descendants of Joséphine-Charlotte in Luxembourg come to mind. Are they also "direct descendants"? No. Of course not. They are direct descendants of the Kings of France, of Spain and of the Dukes of Parma. They are indirect descendants of Leopold I, in the usual understanding of that concept in terms of nobility and royalty.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

But if one considers descendants not in the paternal lineage to be "indirect descendants", then how does one explain that Amedeo is a Prince of Belgium? As Mbruno noted, the royal decree of 1991 made only the princes(ses) in direct lineage of the future Albert II "Princes or Princesses of Belgium".

Further, Article 1 of the royal decree of 2015 reserves the inherited "Prince/ss of Belgium" title to princes(ses) in direct lineage of the King and of the Crown Princess. Would you say then that the children of Princess Eléonore will not be Prince/ss of Belgium?

To add more confusion to an already confusing thread, I looked up how Prince Lorenz was addressed in Belgian documents before he was made a Prince of Belgium. The goal of this exercise was to figure out how his Austrian titles appeared in Belgian documents.

First, see below an excerpt from the Transition Provisions (Title IX) of the constitution of Belgium itself. The following article has to do with the constitutional amendment that introduced equal primogeniture in the succession to the throne. Since Princess Astrid entered the line of succession after she had already got married to Lorenz, a special provision had to be inserted in the constitution to give retroactive consent to her marriage so that she would not lose her place in the line of succession under the terms of Art. 85.

I. Les dispositions de l’article 85 seront pour la première fois d’application
à la descendance de S.A.R. le Prince Albert, Félix, Humbert, Théodore, Christian,
Eugène, Marie, Prince de Liège, Prince de Belgique, étant entendu que le mariage
de S.A.R. la Princesse Astrid, Joséphine, Charlotte, Fabrizia, Elisabeth, Paola, Marie,
Princesse de Belgique, avec Lorenz, Archiduc d’Autriche-Este, est censé avoir
obtenu le consentement visé à l’article 85, alinéa 2.

Note that Astrid, as a Princess of Belgium, is referred to by the style HRH (S.A.R. in French), but Lorenz is not styled HI&RH.

Next, see an excerpt of King Albert II's royal decree of 10/11/1995 that created Lorenz a Prince of Belgium in his own right. Again, the style HI&RH is not used to refer to Lorenz, with the caveat, however, that, in this particular case, Astrid is not styled HRH either.

Art. 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui le concernent, l'Archiduc Lorenz – Otto – Carl - Amedeus d'Autriche-Este, époux de Notre Fille bien-aimée, la Princesse Astrid – Joséphine – Charlotte – Fabrizia – Elisabeth – Paola - Marie, Princesse de Belgique, sera qualifié Prince de Belgique à la suite des noms et titres qui lui sont propres.

Note also that, in the agenda at the website of the Royal House, Astrid and Lorenz are always styled Their Royal Highnesses (which is their proper style in Belgium), but never Their Imperial & Royal Highnesses. For example:

Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Elisabeth, le Prince Gabriel, le Prince Emmanuel et la Princesse Eléonore, Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Astrid et le Prince Lorenz, Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Claire, le Prince Nicolas et le Prince Aymeric assistent également au concert.

Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Astrid et le Prince Lorenz assistent aux funérailles de S.M. le Roi Michael I de Roumanie. La cérémonie se déroule à Bucarest.

Overall, I don't think there is a legal basis to use the style HI&RH in Anna-Astrid's birth certificate as it was done, probably at the insistence of her parents or, more likely, of her grandparents. She can still be called a princess under Art.4 of the 2015 royal decree as a descendant in direct line of King Léopold I, but she cannot be called a princess of Belgium (which she correctly was not in her birth certificate) or be styled HRH. Her Austrian style of HI&RH, like her father's before here, is probably not recognized in Belgium.

Thank you very much for the insights, Mbruno.

It seems that before Lorenz and his children were made Princes/ses of Belgium, the style HI&RH did appear in the municipal registry. The Le Soir article which I posted stated that the name on Amedeo's Belgian birth certificate was "[His] Imperial and Royal Highness, Prince Amedeo Maria Josef Carl Pierre Philippe Paola Marco d'Aviano Archduke of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)". I also have read somewhere that Lorenz had the name "His Imperial and Royal Highness Archduke Lorenz (…) of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)" in his Belgian marriage certificate, although in that case, I do not know what the source was.

Conversely, in all documents issued after they were created Princes of Belgium, the style HI&RH was dropped, as shown in your final examples. Lorenz is referred to as "H.R.H. Prince Lorenz of Belgium" in the State Gazette as well.
Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad

 

[Vizier]

So does the Princess Anna Astrid precedent suggest that Laurent's grandchildren will be Princes and Princesses although not "of Belgium"?

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

So does the Princess Anna Astrid precedent suggest that Laurent's grandchildren will be Princes and Princesses although not "of Belgium"?

Probably. But in Laurent's case a title like prins van Saksen-Coburg en Gotha would be a "logic" one as Laurent is a male agnate of that House. In the case of Astrid we see that her granddaughter, born in the House of Austria-Este and entitled to her father's many, many titles, is styled as "prinses" (without futher designation). It simply lacks a clear reason.

 

[Somebody]

But if one considers descendants not in the paternal lineage to be "indirect descendants", then how does one explain that Amedeo is a Prince of Belgium? As Mbruno noted, the royal decree of 1991 made only the princes(ses) in direct lineage of the future Albert II "Princes or Princesses of Belgium".

He was MADE a prince of Belgium because he wasn't one based on his paternal lineage. So, Anna Astrid is a descendant from a prince of Belgium (namely her father) but not from Leopold I. If all of his descendants in female were to use their princely titles we should have seen quite an influx of princes and princesses (without specification) just after the decree was issued.

Further, Article 1 of the royal decree of 2015 reserves the inherited "Prince/ss of Belgium" title to princes(ses) in direct lineage of the King and of the Crown Princess. Would you say then that the children of Princess Eléonore will not be Prince/ss of Belgium?

That's a new rule; and it seems to suggest that her children (but NOT her grandchildren) will be prince(sse)s of Belgium.

Thank you very much for the insights, Mbruno.

It seems that before Lorenz and his children were made Princes/ses of Belgium, the style HI&RH did appear in the municipal registry. The Le Soir article which I posted stated that the name on Amedeo's Belgian birth certificate was "[His] Imperial and Royal Highness, Prince Amedeo Maria Josef Carl Pierre Philippe Paola Marco d'Aviano Archduke of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)". I also have read somewhere that Lorenz had the name "His Imperial and Royal Highness Archduke Lorenz (…) of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)" in his Belgian marriage certificate, although in that case, I do not know what the source was.

Conversely, in all documents issued after they were created Princes of Belgium, the style HI&RH was dropped, as shown in your final examples. Lorenz is referred to as "H.R.H. Prince Lorenz of Belgium" in the State Gazette as well.
Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad

So, Amedeo and Maria Laura were ALWAYS styled as princes and princesses in Belgium by the court? Even before they were created prince and princess of Belgium? Were they also considered (Imperial and/or Royal) Highnesses?

 

[Somebody]

What I meant to stress was that the facts of her registration on her birth certificate as "Princess Anna Astrid Marie", and the Royal Court consistently addressing her as "Princess Anna Astrid", are facts on the record rather than mere speculation.

Yes, that point was clear. We mainly wonder whether there was a basis to do so, especially since the court doesn't always seem to get it right.

The logic or illogic of the decisions made by the Brussels registrar and the Royal Court, and if the wording of the royal decree accurately provided for the king's apparent intent or not, are open to interpretation, absolutely.

Glad that we agree.

I have tried to abstain from interpreting the vague portions of the decree. So, it remains unclear to me if the intent is to treat paternal and maternal lineage the same, specifically Amedeo's children opposite his sisters' hypothetical children.

Ok, nobody seems to know for sure

As the entire royal family used the title of prince or princess without a designation until 1891, likewise Amedeo until 1991, I think it makes sense that a great-grandchild without "of Belgium" has reverted to the pre-1891/1991 title.

The 'pre 1991' portion was new to me; the situation before 1891 didn't seem that relevant as in my eyes the 'of Belgium' was implied, because of what else were they princes and princesses. And they were all considered part of the royal house of Belgium. That isn't the case any longer. Moreover, it was only applied to male line descendants, so they were all titled!

I am slightly confused by your comment. When the prince designation does not rely on the prince of Belgium title, the prince designation is capable of being passed on to his daughter without the prince of Belgium title, surely?
Now I understand your reasoning as you have stated that Amedeo was a prince even before he became a prince of Belgium, so in your eyes him being 'prince Amedeo' is independent of him being 'prince Amedeo of Belgium'. I still have a hard time wrapping my head around it.

The Palace confirmed to Le Soir that "de andere titels die hun rechtens hun ascendentie toekomen" in the decree is applicable to the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha titles. However, the decree states that those titles are used after the name, and so they are thereby separate from the "prince/ss without a designation" title, which is used before the name.

So, can the 'prince(ss) without a designation' title also be passed on based on this article. If so, why didn't princess Esmeralda's children start calling themselves 'princess Alexandra Moncada' and 'prince Leopoldo Moncada'?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I will respond to your comments in time.


In the interim, I would like to provide a translation of the major articles of the Royal Decrees of 1891, 1991, and 2015.


Royal Decree, March 14, 1891

Article 1. In the public and private acts relating to them, the princes and the princesses born in direct male descendance from the late His Majesty Leopold I will be referred to as princes and princesses of Belgium, following their first names and preceding the mention of their original title of duke or duchess of Saxony.

Royal Decree, December 2, 1991

Article 1. In the public and private acts relating to them, the Princes and the Princesses born in descendance in direct line from H.R.H. Prince Albert, Felix, Humbert, Theodore, Christian, Eugene, Marie, Prince of Liege, Prince of Belgium, will be referred to as Princes or Princesses of Belgium, following their first names.

Royal Decree, November 12, 2015

Article 1. In the public and private acts relating to them, the Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, born in direct descendance from the King, as well as the Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, born in direct descendance from the Crown Prince or the Crown Princess, carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium following their first name, and their family name and their dynastic title so far as they carry them, and ahead of the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. Their first name is preceded by the predicate His or Her Royal Highness.

Article 2. In the public and private acts relating to them, the Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, born in direct descendance from His Majesty King Albert II, carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium following their first name, and their family name and their dynastic title so far as they carry them, and ahead of the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. Their first name is preceded by the predicate His or Her Royal Highness.

Article 3. The Princes and the Princesses who already carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium pursuant to the Royal Decree of 14 March 1891 qualifying the Princes and Princesses born in direct male descendance from the late His Majesty Leopold I to be Princes and Princesses of Belgium, retain this title following their first name, and their family name so far as they carry it, and before the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. Their first name is preceded by the predicate His or Her Royal Highness.

Article 4. The Princes and Princesses born in direct descendance from His Majesty Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, who are not covered by Articles 1 to 3, carry following their first name, and their family name so far as they carry it, the titles to which their ancestry gives them the right.


The royal decrees of 1891 and 1991
Royal Titles in Belgium - Titres Royaux en Belgique

The royal decree of 2015
Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad
Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad

 

[Tatiana Maria]

He was MADE a prince of Belgium because he wasn't one based on his paternal lineage. [...]

The question was if descendants from a female line are regarded as "direct descendants" or as "indirect descendants". (Indirect descendants are not entitled to royal titles under any of the royal decrees.)


The Constitution speaks about direct descent from King Leopold I when it comes to succession to the throne.

Article 85
The constitutional powers of the King are hereditary through the direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, by order of primogeniture."

http://www.lachambre.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf​

Indirect descendants, adoptive descendants, and illegitimate descendants of King Leopold I are thereby excluded from the line of succession to the Belgian throne.

The future children of Princess Elisabeth of Belgium, Duchess of Brabant, will be descendants in maternal lineage from Leopold I. The children of her aunt, Astrid, are descendants in maternal lineage from Leopold I. Assuming descendants in maternal lineage are regarded as "indirect descendants", the Duchess of Brabant's future children and Princess Astrid's children should be excluded from the line of succession. Is that actually how the Constitution should be read?



The text of the royal decree of December 2, 1991 in Dutch is

Artikel 1. In de openbare en private akten die hen aanbelangen, dragen de Prinsen en de Prinsessen, geboren uit de nakomelingschap in rechte lijn van Z.K.H. Prins Albert, Felix, Humbert, Theodoor, Christiaan, Eugène, Marie, Prins van Luik, Prins van België, de titel van Prins of van Prinses van België. Die titel volgt op hun voornamen.
Art. 2. Het koninklijk besluit van 14 maart 1891, dat de titel van Prins en van Prinses van België verleent aan de Prinsen en Prinsessen geboren uit de mannelijke nakomelingschap in rechte lijn van Wijlen Zijne Majesteit Leopold I, wordt opgeheven.
Art. 3. Onze Eerste Minister en Onze Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken zijn, ieder wat hem betreft, belast met de uitvoering van dit besluit."
​

(Article 1. In the public and private acts relating to them, the Princes and the Princesses born in descendance in direct line from H.R.H. Prince Albert, Felix, Humbert, Theodoor, Christiaan, Eugène, Marie, Prince of Luik, Prince of Belgium, carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium. That title follows their first names.)

No indirect descendants were made princes of Belgium with that decree, because it refers to no one but Albert's descendants "in direct line". Amedeo is a grandson of Albert in maternal lineage, so, if grandchildren in maternal lineage are regarded as "indirect descendants", what decree made Amedeo a prince of Belgium?

Yes, that point was clear. We mainly wonder whether there was a basis to do so, especially since the court doesn't always seem to get it right.

Thank you for clarifying. I will respond to your other points later on.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

This systematic is a prayer without end. All is pretty clear: the children and grandchildren of a King and a Crown Prince are Princes (Princesses) of Belgium. Ready. Crisp and crystalclear.

Anna-Astrid is no child or grandchild of a King or a Crown Prince. That she suddely is styled as "prinses" Anna-Astrid (without HRH and without designation) is the confusing thing. It is almost as if "prinses" is not seen as a title but as a predicaten, a form of adress: "Yes Princess, no of course not Princess".

It all looks so ill-thought. Anyway, we will see what happens with the children from other marriages in the royal family.

 

[sancakli70]

Its like in jordan they have hundret of princes and princesses

 

[Somebody]

I will respond to your comments in time.


In the interim, I would like to provide a translation of the major articles of the Royal Decrees of 1891, 1991, and 2015.

Thanks, although I prefer to read them in Dutch as things might get lost in translation

 

[Somebody]

The question was if descendants from a female line are regarded as "direct descendants" or as "indirect descendants". (Indirect descendants are not entitled to royal titles under any of the royal decrees.)

The Constitution speaks about direct descent from King Leopold I when it comes to succession to the throne.

Article 85
The constitutional powers of the King are hereditary through the direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, by order of primogeniture."

http://www.lachambre.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf​

Indirect descendants, adoptive descendants, and illegitimate descendants of King Leopold I are thereby excluded from the line of succession to the Belgian throne.

The future children of Princess Elisabeth of Belgium, Duchess of Brabant, will be descendants in maternal lineage from Leopold I. The children of her aunt, Astrid, are descendants in maternal lineage from Leopold I. Assuming descendants in maternal lineage are regarded as "indirect descendants", the Duchess of Brabant's future children and Princess Astrid's children should be excluded from the line of succession. Is that actually how the Constitution should be read?

The text of the royal decree of December 2, 1991 in Dutch is

Artikel 1. In de openbare en private akten die hen aanbelangen, dragen de Prinsen en de Prinsessen, geboren uit de nakomelingschap in rechte lijn van Z.K.H. Prins Albert, Felix, Humbert, Theodoor, Christiaan, Eugène, Marie, Prins van Luik, Prins van België, de titel van Prins of van Prinses van België. Die titel volgt op hun voornamen.
Art. 2. Het koninklijk besluit van 14 maart 1891, dat de titel van Prins en van Prinses van België verleent aan de Prinsen en Prinsessen geboren uit de mannelijke nakomelingschap in rechte lijn van Wijlen Zijne Majesteit Leopold I, wordt opgeheven.
Art. 3. Onze Eerste Minister en Onze Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken zijn, ieder wat hem betreft, belast met de uitvoering van dit besluit."
​

(Article 1. In the public and private acts relating to them, the Princes and the Princesses born in descendance in direct line from H.R.H. Prince Albert, Felix, Humbert, Theodoor, Christiaan, Eugène, Marie, Prince of Luik, Prince of Belgium, carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium. That title follows their first names.)

No indirect descendants were made princes of Belgium with that decree, because it refers to no one but Albert's descendants "in direct line". Amedeo is a grandson of Albert in maternal lineage, so, if grandchildren in maternal lineage are regarded as "indirect descendants", what decree made Amedeo a prince of Belgium?

Thank you for clarifying. I will respond to your other points later on.

However, the article on which Anna's 'princess' address aparently is based does not reference descendancd from king Albert but king Leopold I.

I still do not read that everyone descending from Leopold I can suddenly claim to be a prince or princess. It seems to explain how those who are princes and princesses should go about their titles and predicates.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Article 85 of the Constitution also references direct descendance from King Leopold I, not King Albert II.

However, I don't understand what you have said here. Are Amedeo and Anna Astrid direct descendants of Albert II but not direct descendants of Leopold I in your opinion?

I still do not read that everyone descending from Leopold I can suddenly claim to be a prince or princess. It seems to explain how those who are princes and princesses should go about their titles and predicates.

That is how I understand it:

Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad
It does not say that all descendants of King Leopold I are princes and princesses, but it indeed means that at least a portion of them will be.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

So, Amedeo and Maria Laura were ALWAYS styled as princes and princesses in Belgium by the court? Even before they were created prince and princess of Belgium? Were they also considered (Imperial and/or Royal) Highnesses?

So, can the 'prince(ss) without a designation' title also be passed on based on this article. If so, why didn't princess Esmeralda's children start calling themselves 'princess Alexandra Moncada' and 'prince Leopoldo Moncada'?

I would like to draw a line between the known and the unknown.


It is credibly known that:

1: On Amedeo's birth certificate in Belgium, "[Son] Altesse impériale et royale, prince Amedeo Maria Josef Carl Pierre Philippe Paola Marco d'Aviano Archiduc d'Autriche-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)" (my bolding) was listed as his name.

2: On Anna Astrid's birth certificate in Belgium, "Son Altesse Impériale et Royale la Princesse Anna Astrid Marie Archiduchesse d'Autriche-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)" was listed as her name.

3: The Palace invariably refers to Anna Astrid as "Princess Anna Astrid" on a formal basis and has never referred to her as Archduchess at any time.

Sources: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...elgian-royal-family-38975-11.html#post2071175


It is not known:

1: On what basis Belgium recognized the titles, predicates, and surnames of Prince Amedeo (in 1986) and Princess Anna Astrid.
2: Which other descendants of Leopold I, apart from the Princes/ses of Belgium, are defined as Prince/Princess or permitted to be registered in Belgium as Prince/Princess.


Bearing this in mind, I would rather not speculate on whether or not Alexandra and Leopoldo Moncada would be recognized in Belgium as Princess/Prince. (I do not know what they call themselves, although I would assume they call themselves "Alexandra Moncada" and "Leopoldo Moncada".) As far as I'm aware the Royal House never refers to them, and they have neither lived in Belgium nor appeared in Belgian documents.


But it is noteworthy that, historically, it never needed a Royal Decree to grant descendants of Leopold I the dignity of Prince/Princess.

The children and grandchildren of Leopold I, the first king of the Belgians, were born with the title of Prince/Princess, but to the best of my knowledge, there was no Royal Decree to stipulate that they would be princes and princesses. The descendants bestowed with the title Prince/ss of Belgium by the Royal Decrees of 1891 and 1991 were Princes and Princesses even before the decrees were issued.

 

[Somebody]

Article 85 of the Constitution also references direct descendance from King Leopold I, not King Albert II.

However, I don't understand what you have said here. Are Amedeo and Anna Astrid direct descendants of Albert II but not direct descendants of Leopold I in your opinion?

Apparently it was decided in the 1990's to treat Amedeo (and therefore also his off-spring) as a direct descendant of king Albert II by making him a prince of Belgium because of his mother. If all male and female (and male/female) descendants should be considered direct descendants of king Leopold I we would have far more 'princes and princesses' of nothing.

That is how I understand it:

So, how is it determined who are princes and princesses and who are not? And based on which law/rule?

 

[Somebody]

I would like to draw a line between the known and the unknown.


It is credibly known that:

1: On Amedeo's birth certificate in Belgium, "[Son] Altesse impériale et royale, prince Amedeo Maria Josef Carl Pierre Philippe Paola Marco d'Aviano Archiduc d'Autriche-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)" (my bolding) was listed as his name.

2: On Anna Astrid's birth certificate in Belgium, "Son Altesse Impériale et Royale la Princesse Anna Astrid Marie Archiduchesse d'Autriche-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)" was listed as her name.

3: The Palace invariably refers to Anna Astrid as "Princess Anna Astrid" on a formal basis and has never referred to her as Archduchess at any time.

Sources: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...elgian-royal-family-38975-11.html#post2071175


It is not known:

1: On what basis Belgium recognized the titles, predicates, and surnames of Prince Amedeo (in 1986) and Princess Anna Astrid.
2: Which other descendants of Leopold I, apart from the Princes/ses of Belgium, are defined as Prince/Princess or permitted to be registered in Belgium as Prince/Princess.


Bearing this in mind, I would rather not speculate on whether or not Alexandra and Leopoldo Moncada would be recognized in Belgium as Princess/Prince. (I do not know what they call themselves, although I would assume they call themselves "Alexandra Moncada" and "Leopoldo Moncada".) As far as I'm aware the Royal House never refers to them, and they have neither lived in Belgium nor appeared in Belgian documents.


But it is noteworthy that, historically, it never needed a Royal Decree to grant descendants of Leopold I the dignity of Prince/Princess.

The children and grandchildren of Leopold I, the first king of the Belgians, were born with the title of Prince/Princess, but to the best of my knowledge, there was no Royal Decree to stipulate that they would be princes and princesses. The descendants bestowed with the title Prince/ss of Belgium by the Royal Decrees of 1891 and 1991 were Princes and Princesses even before the decrees were issued.

Thanks for presenting the evidence and assumptions so clearly. Based on the fact that Amedeo's and Anna Astrid's birth certificates reference them as 'imperial and royal highness' we may assume that their title (of prince(ss) depends on their Austrian lineage (i.e., them being archduke/archduchess of Austria Este etc). As you pointed out previously, as soon as Amedeo (and his siblings and father) were made princes of Belgium, the court dropped the 'imperial' and they were consistently styled as 'his/her royal highness' instead of 'his/her imperial and royal highness'.

 

[Mbruno]

Thanks for presenting the evidence and assumptions so clearly. Based on the fact that Amedeo's and Anna Astrid's birth certificates reference them as 'imperial and royal highness' we may assume that their title (of prince(ss) depends on their Austrian lineage (i.e., them being archduke/archduchess of Austria Este etc). As you pointed out previously, as soon as Amedeo (and his siblings and father) were made princes of Belgium, the court dropped the 'imperial' and they were consistently styled as 'his/her royal highness' instead of 'his/her imperial and royal highness'.

Just to add more confusion to an already confusing topic, the royal decree that created Lorenz a prince of Belgium doesn't make any mention of the style "HI&RH". He was simply "the Archduke Lorenz-Otto-Carl-Amedeus of Austria-Este". The actual wording of the decree is shown in the quote below.

Article 1. Dans les actes publics et privés qui le concernent, l'Archiduc Lorenz-Otto-Carl-Amedeus d'Autriche-Este, époux de Notre Fille bien-aimée, la Princesse Astrid-Joséphine-Charlotte-Fabrizia-Elisabeth-Paola-Marie, Princesse de Belgique, sera qualifié Prince de Belgique à la suite des noms et titres qui lui sont propres.

He wasn't styled HI&RH either in the transition provisions of the Belgian constitution, whereas Astrid and Albert on the other hand are styled as HRH , unlike in the royal decree above.

(English Translation from servat.unibe.ch)

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][Part I Rules of Succession]

(1) The dispositions of Article 85 shall for the first time be applicable to the descent from H.R.H. Prince Albert, Felix, Humbert, Theodore, Christian, Eugene, Marie, Prince of Liege, Prince of Belgium, it being understood that the marriage of H.R.H. Princess Astrid, Josephine, Charlotte, Fabrizia, Elisabeth, Paola, Marie, Princess of Belgium, with Lorenz, Archduke of East Austria, was meant to have obtained theconsent

described in Article 85 (2).

[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]

My personal opinion is that neither Amedeo nor Anna-Astrid should have been styled HI&RH in their birth certificates. That style was used probably because their parents/ grandparents insisted on it.

On the broader question of who is a prince or not, although it is not explicit in the text, I don't see how we can interpret the 1891, 1991 and 2015 royal decrees in any way other than that all dynasts are automatically princes or princesses, which of course is not the same as being a prince/princess of Belgium or an HRH.
[/FONT]

 

[Somebody]

On the broader question of who is a prince or not, although it is not explicit in the text, I don't see how we can interpret the 1891, 1991 and 2015 royal decrees in any way other than that all dynasts are automatically princes or princesses, which of course is not the same as being a prince/princess of Belgium or an HRH.

Amedeo wasn't a dynast at birth. So, he shouldn't have been 'prince Amedeo' on his birth certificate from this perspective. Anna Astrid on the other hand is a dynast according to the newer rules.

As I am not aware of any restrictions for Albert's descendants, if your interpretation is correct, we will see prince/princess X 'surname' and could see that for many, many generations to come. Of course an easy way to keep the number of princes limited is to not give consent for marriage of great-grandchildren of monarchs (as they retroactively decided that Amedeo needed that permission so he and his children could remain in line to the throne apparently they prefer to keep grandchildren and their children in the line of succession).

To me it is mainly evidence that things were not carefully thought through - as we've seen regarding Amedeo. Probably the court only starts to realize when Maria Laura is about to have children.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Apparently it was decided in the 1990's to treat Amedeo (and therefore also his off-spring) as a direct descendant of king Albert II by making him a prince of Belgium because of his mother. If all male and female (and male/female) descendants should be considered direct descendants of king Leopold I we would have far more 'princes and princesses' of nothing.

Regardless of titles, if Amedeo should not be considered a direct descendant of Leopold I, then neither should Elisabeth's future children, who like Amedeo will be descendants from Leopold I through their mother.

As I mentioned before, according to Article 85 of the Constitution, succession to the throne is restricted to direct descendants of Leopold I.

"Article 85
The constitutional powers of the King are hereditary through the direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, by order of primogeniture."

http://www.lachambre.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf​

As a result, if only the male-line descendants should be considered "direct" descendants of King Leopold I, then Amedeo and his siblings should not be included in the order of succession, and upon Elisabeth's death the succession should bypass Elisabeth's children and pass to Gabriel, which would be absurd.

On the broader question of who is a prince or not, although it is not explicit in the text, I don't see how we can interpret the 1891, 1991 and 2015 royal decrees in any way other than that all dynasts are automatically princes or princesses, which of course is not the same as being a prince/princess of Belgium or an HRH.

My interpretation is that the 1891, 1991, and 2015 decrees do not determine which descendants are princes and princesses. They mainly instruct that any descendants who are princes or princesses and fall under the rules of the respective decree are entitled to use the title "Prince/ss of Belgium" and/or lesser titles.

Decrees and a translation: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...elgian-royal-family-38975-13.html#post2072492

Based on the fact that Amedeo's and Anna Astrid's birth certificates reference them as 'imperial and royal highness' we may assume that their title (of prince(ss) depends on their Austrian lineage (i.e., them being archduke/archduchess of Austria Este etc).

That is entirely possible, but having said that, Lorenz - unlike his children - apparently was never given the titular dignity of prince before he was given the title Prince of Belgium.

To add more confusion to an already confusing thread, I looked up how Prince Lorenz was addressed in Belgian documents before he was made a Prince of Belgium. The goal of this exercise was to figure out how his Austrian titles appeared in Belgian documents.

First, see below an excerpt from the Transition Provisions (Title IX) of the constitution of Belgium itself. The following article has to do with the constitutional amendment that introduced equal primogeniture in the succession to the throne. Since Princess Astrid entered the line of succession after she had already got married to Lorenz, a special provision had to be inserted in the constitution to give retroactive consent to her marriage so that she would not lose her place in the line of succession under the terms of Art. 85.

I. Les dispositions de l’article 85 seront pour la première fois d’application
à la descendance de S.A.R. le Prince Albert, Félix, Humbert, Théodore, Christian,
Eugène, Marie, Prince de Liège, Prince de Belgique, étant entendu que le mariage
de S.A.R. la Princesse Astrid, Joséphine, Charlotte, Fabrizia, Elisabeth, Paola, Marie,
Princesse de Belgique, avec Lorenz, Archiduc d’Autriche-Este, est censé avoir
obtenu le consentement visé à l’article 85, alinéa 2.

Note that Astrid, as a Princess of Belgium, is referred to by the style HRH (S.A.R. in French), but Lorenz is not styled HI&RH.

Next, see an excerpt of King Albert II's royal decree of 10/11/1995 that created Lorenz a Prince of Belgium in his own right. Again, the style HI&RH is not used to refer to Lorenz, with the caveat, however, that, in this particular case, Astrid is not styled HRH either.

Art. 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui le concernent, l'Archiduc Lorenz – Otto – Carl - Amedeus d'Autriche-Este, époux de Notre Fille bien-aimée, la Princesse Astrid – Joséphine – Charlotte – Fabrizia – Elisabeth – Paola - Marie, Princesse de Belgique, sera qualifié Prince de Belgique à la suite des noms et titres qui lui sont propres.

Note also that, in the agenda at the website of the Royal House, Astrid and Lorenz are always styled Their Royal Highnesses (which is their proper style in Belgium), but never Their Imperial & Royal Highnesses. For example:

Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Elisabeth, le Prince Gabriel, le Prince Emmanuel et la Princesse Eléonore, Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Astrid et le Prince Lorenz, Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Claire, le Prince Nicolas et le Prince Aymeric assistent également au concert.

Leurs Altesses Royales la Princesse Astrid et le Prince Lorenz assistent aux funérailles de S.M. le Roi Michael I de Roumanie. La cérémonie se déroule à Bucarest.

Overall, I don't think there is a legal basis to use the style HI&RH in Anna-Astrid's birth certificate as it was done, probably at the insistence of her parents or, more likely, of her grandparents. She can still be called a princess under Art.4 of the 2015 royal decree as a descendant in direct line of King Léopold I, but she cannot be called a princess of Belgium (which she correctly was not in her birth certificate) or be styled HRH. Her Austrian style of HI&RH, like her father's before here, is probably not recognized in Belgium.

 

[Somebody]

Regardless of titles, if Amedeo should not be considered a direct descendant of Leopold I, then neither should Elisabeth's future children, who like Amedeo will be descendants from Leopold I through their mother.

As I mentioned before, according to Article 85 of the Constitution, succession to the throne is restricted to direct descendants of Leopold I.

"Article 85
The constitutional powers of the King are hereditary through the direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, by order of primogeniture."

http://www.lachambre.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf​

As a result, if only the male-line descendants should be considered "direct" descendants of King Leopold I, then Amedeo and his siblings should not be included in the order of succession, and upon Elisabeth's death the succession should bypass Elisabeth's children and pass to Gabriel, which would be absurd.

Clearly, something has changed. Previously, only male-line descendants were considered direct descendants of King Leopold I. Only for the descendants of Albert II the 'direct descendants' have been interpreted to include female line descendants. Otherwise, count Leopold of Limburg-Stirum (and with him the whole Luxembourgish grand ducal family) would be much higher in line to the Belgian throne as a direct descendant of a more senior branch than his second cousin once removed (the current Duchess of Brabant). And Belgium would currently be ruled by Queen Stéphanie (born: princess of Windisch-Graetz) or (if she had abdicated) by king Henry (born: Henry Victor William Blundell-Hollinshead-Blundel). [if I am not mistaken]

My interpretation is that the 1891, 1991, and 2015 decrees do not determine which descendants are princes and princesses. They mainly instruct that any descendants who are princes or princesses and fall under the rules of the respective decree are entitled to use the title "Prince/ss of Belgium" and/or lesser titles.

Decrees and a translation: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...elgian-royal-family-38975-13.html#post2072492

Glad to see that we agree. That's my interpretation as well. However, what are your thoughts on how it should be determined who is and who is not a 'prince(ss)' among the direct (and indirect) descendants of king Leopold I?

That is entirely possible, but having said that, Lorenz - unlike his children - apparently was never given the titular dignity of prince before he was given the title Prince of Belgium.

I am open for any alternative explanation but this seems the most logical one for now. Although I agree that it is strange that Lorenz' older children were acknowledged as imperial & royal highnesses from birth while he himself was not recognized as such (in addition, he received his title of prince of Belgium a few years after his children).

We probably have to wait for either Maria Laura or her younger sisters or niece Louise to see whether their children will also be considered prince(ss); as their style cannot be derived from the Austrian title.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Clearly, something has changed. Previously, only male-line descendants were considered direct descendants of King Leopold I. Only for the descendants of Albert II the 'direct descendants' have been interpreted to include female line descendants. Otherwise, count Leopold of Limburg-Stirum (and with him the whole Luxembourgish grand ducal family) would be much higher in line to the Belgian throne as a direct descendant of a more senior branch than his second cousin once removed (the current Duchess of Brabant). And Belgium would currently be ruled by Queen Stéphanie (born: princess of Windisch-Graetz) or (if she had abdicated) by king Henry (born: Henry Victor William Blundell-Hollinshead-Blundel). [if I am not mistaken]

No, female-line descendants have always been considered direct descendants of King Leopold I. This was fairly clear in the original Constitution's provisions concerning the succession, which are quoted in the 1991 transitional provision:

I. – The provisions of Article 85 will for the first time be applicable to the progeny of H.R.H. Prince Albert, Felix, Humbert, Theodore, Christian, Eugene, Marie, Prince of Liege, Prince of Belgium, it being understood that the marriage of H.R.H. Princess Astrid, Josephine, Charlotte, Fabrizia, Elisabeth, Paola, Marie, Princess of Belgium to Lorenz, Archduke of Austria-Este, is regarded as having obtained the consent described in Article 85, second paragraph.

Until such time, the following provisions remain in effect.

The constitutional powers of the King are hereditary through the direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, from male to male, by order of primogeniture and with the permanent exclusion of women and of their descendants. […]

http://www.lachambre.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf​

If the female-line descendants of Leopold I had previously been considered indirect, the wording "through the direct […] descent" should have been sufficient to exclude them from the succession from 1831 to 1991, and to mention further "from male to male" and "with the permanent exclusion of women and their descendants" would have been unnecessary.

Glad to see that we agree. That's my interpretation as well. However, what are your thoughts on how it should be determined who is and who is not a 'prince(ss)' among the direct (and indirect) descendants of king Leopold I?

[...]

I am open for any alternative explanation but this seems the most logical one for now. Although I agree that it is strange that Lorenz' older children were acknowledged as imperial & royal highnesses from birth while he himself was not recognized as such (in addition, he received his title of prince of Belgium a few years after his children).

We probably have to wait for either Maria Laura or her younger sisters or niece Louise to see whether their children will also be considered prince(ss); as their style cannot be derived from the Austrian title.

Lorenz was reportedly acknowledged as Imperial and Royal Highness in his Belgian identity documents, although not in Belgian laws and decrees, before he received his Prince of Belgium title. However, it seems that he was not recognized as a Prince, in contrast to his children born with the acknowledged title of Prince/Princess.

Unfortunately I do not know anything concerning the rules used for determination of the attribute of prince/ss in connection with the descendants of Leopold I or their spouses, so we will have to wait to see.

 

[Somebody]

No, female-line descendants have always been considered direct descendants of King Leopold I. This was fairly clear in the original Constitution's provisions concerning the succession, which are quoted in the 1991 transitional provision:

I. – The provisions of Article 85 will for the first time be applicable to the progeny of H.R.H. Prince Albert, Felix, Humbert, Theodore, Christian, Eugene, Marie, Prince of Liege, Prince of Belgium, it being understood that the marriage of H.R.H. Princess Astrid, Josephine, Charlotte, Fabrizia, Elisabeth, Paola, Marie, Princess of Belgium to Lorenz, Archduke of Austria-Este, is regarded as having obtained the consent described in Article 85, second paragraph.

Until such time, the following provisions remain in effect.

The constitutional powers of the King are hereditary through the direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, from male to male, by order of primogeniture and with the permanent exclusion of women and of their descendants. […]

http://www.lachambre.be/kvvcr/pdf_sections/publications/constitution/GrondwetUK.pdf​

If the female-line descendants of Leopold I had previously been considered indirect, the wording "through the direct […] descent" should have been sufficient to exclude them from the succession from 1831 to 1991, and to mention further "from male to male" and "with the permanent exclusion of women and their descendants" would have been unnecessary.

My interpretation is that daughters were always considered direct descendants but their children weren't, so, that's why it was necessary to state clearly that hereditary rights were from male-to-male only (the part on 'and their descendants' wouldn't be strictly necessary as it would be implied, so I see how it can be interpreted differently).

Lorenz was reportedly acknowledged as Imperial and Royal Highness in his Belgian identity documents, although not in Belgian laws and decrees, before he received his Prince of Belgium title. However, it seems that he was not recognized as a Prince, in contrast to his children born with the acknowledged title of Prince/Princess.

Unfortunately I do not know anything concerning the rules used for determination of the attribute of prince/ss in connection with the descendants of Leopold I or their spouses, so we will have to wait to see.

Do we have any proof that he was indeed acknowledged as Imperial and Royal Highness? Would be interesting to see those as that would raise the question why the court didn't acknowledge him as such.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

My interpretation is that daughters were always considered direct descendants but their children weren't, so, that's why it was necessary to state clearly that hereditary rights were from male-to-male only (the part on 'and their descendants' wouldn't be strictly necessary as it would be implied, so I see how it can be interpreted differently).

Is there a legal foundation for excluding children of daughters from direct descendants? In the Constitution of Belgium, the 1991 revision only deleted the phrases "from male to male" and "with the permanent exclusion of women and of their descendants", which affirms that those two were the operative phrases which barred the children of daughters and the daughters themselves from the succession from 1831 to 1991.

1831

The constitutional powers of the King are hereditary through the direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, from male to male, by order of primogeniture and with the permanent exclusion of women and of their descendants.

1991

The constitutional powers of the King are hereditary through the direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, by order of primogeniture.
​

The rest of the paragraph stood untouched, including the word "direct". As Amedeo and Maria Laura entered the line of succession in 1991, they were evidently considered "direct, natural and legitimate descent from H.M. Leopold".

Do we have any proof that he was indeed acknowledged as Imperial and Royal Highness? Would be interesting to see those as that would raise the question why the court didn't acknowledge him as such.

No, I haven't seen a copy of his identity documents. I suppose the court could have acknowledged him as HI&RH in social situations.

 

[An Ard Ri]

Is there any likely hood of the King reinstating the titles abolished by his father?

 

[Marchesina]

Is there any likely hood of the King reinstating the titles abolished by his father?

I wish he would but apparently there's a matter of linguistic neutrality which is, IMO, a bit pointless. The king has four children and he could assign titles so that two of them have Flemish titles and two have Wallon ones.

 

[Somebody]

Regarding the earlier discussions on Elisabetta's (and Anna Astrid's) titles. It's interesting to see the development in thank you-cards sent out by the royal family.

At first Elisabetta is considered 'princess Elisabetta' (but without HRH). On one of them Astrid, Lorenz and Amedeo are indicated as HRH but Elisabetta lacks this style. The card sent regarding their 2nd wedding anniversary however refer to her as 'TRH prince and princess Amedeo of Belgium'. So, it seems that before the retroactive permission to marry Elisabetta was considered a princess (without a designation) but not a royal highness and since the permission was granted she is now considered a royal highness as 'prince Amedeo of Belgium'.

 

[An Ard Ri]

I find the entire title situation very confusing regarding Princess Elisabetta/Amedeo of Belgium or what ever they will call her tomorrow.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Regarding the earlier discussions on Elisabetta's (and Anna Astrid's) titles. It's interesting to see the development in thank you-cards sent out by the royal family.

At first Elisabetta is considered 'princess Elisabetta' (but without HRH). On one of them Astrid, Lorenz and Amedeo are indicated as HRH but Elisabetta lacks this style. The card sent regarding their 2nd wedding anniversary however refer to her as 'TRH prince and princess Amedeo of Belgium'. So, it seems that before the retroactive permission to marry Elisabetta was considered a princess (without a designation) but not a royal highness and since the permission was granted she is now considered a royal highness as 'prince Amedeo of Belgium'.

I thought the title is simply standing practice for female spouses married to titled gentlemen. Lea Wolman was HKH prinses Alexander van België / SAR la princesse Alexandre de Belgique. Likewise Elisabetta Rosboch von Wolkenstein is HKH prinses Amedeo van België / SAR la princesse Amedeo de Belgique.

 

[Somebody]

I thought the title is simply standing practice for female spouses married to titled gentlemen. Lea Wolman was HKH prinses Alexander van België / SAR la princesse Alexandre de Belgique. Likewise Elisabetta Rosboch von Wolkenstein is HKH prinses Amedeo van België / SAR la princesse Amedeo de Belgique.

However, initially she was called 'princess Elisabetta' (without HRH or a designation)... at least in their 'thank you cards' (see link in previous post). So, apparently the royal family did not think she was 'HRH princess Amedeo of Belgium'.