Non-British Styles and Titles

[Tatiana Maria]

I wonder if we'll see something similar in other families moving forward. Will Sverre Magnus' wife not be a Princess either? [...]

That question seems to divide Norwegian royal watchers. From this forum, the well-informed Royal Norway predicted that a wife of Sverre Magnus will not be a Princess.

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...-royal-family-2003-a-37155-8.html#post2140522

I could see Denmark having Joachim's daughters-in-law simply be titled as Countesses of Monpezat (if titled at all) rather than Princesses.

According to Prince Joachim, it took some time for his mother the Queen to come to the decision that his second wife would be titled Princess (despite Joachim being an official working royal), so I could imagine the title being withheld from Joachim's daughters-in-law.

https://danishroyalwatchers.blogspot.com/2007/10/joachim-marie-press-conference.html

Belgium could also consider it in the future considering all four of Philippe's children will pass on royal titles to their children and that will be a LOT of Princes/Princesses within a couple of generations.

It's unclear to me if King Philippe's younger daughter will pass on royal titles if she marries a commoner, but a royal decree issued in 2015 along with further announcements made clear that - at least - his sons, Princess Astrid's sons and Prince Laurent's sons will pass on princely titles to their legitimate children, so there will indeed be many Princes/Princesses in the Belgian royal family within a couple of generations, although most of them will not be HRHs or Princes/Princesses of Belgium.

Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...-1-july-2014-present-37162-9.html#post2252197

However, the relevant factors are quite different in Belgium. Hundreds of Princes and Princesses are part of the Belgian nobility, and being "only" Prince or Princess is not an exclusive or royal title in that country.

 

[Mbruno]

However, the relevant factors are quite different in Belgium. Hundreds of Princes and Princesses are part of the Belgian nobility, and being "only" Prince or Princess is not an exclusive or royal title in that country.

Nonetheless, it is odd to me (as a non-Belgian and non-European) that all direct descendants of King Leopold I be called "prince/princess" even though only a small part of them (those born as children or grandchildren of the King or the Crown Prince) will be HRHs (princes/princesses of Belgium).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It is also interesting that the style “ Prince /Princess xxx of Belgium”, which is common in English, is nevertheless not used apparently in Belgium itself. Likewise, it appears that “Prince xxx of Sweden”, although common in English, is not used in Sweden either where, in daily use, one only says “ HRH Prince/Princess xxx”

It is likewise in Spain and in Denmark, with the official titles being Infanta/Infante of Spain and Princess/Prince to/of Denmark respectively, but the "of Spain" and "to/of Denmark" being seldom used in Spain and Denmark themselves.

In Norway, however, the official title is simply Princess/Prince, rather than Princess/Prince of Norway. Abroad, "of Norway" may be added for identification, but it is not an official title. I think it is the same in Britain.

or, in formal use , HRH Xxx, Prince/Princess of Sweden, Duke/Duchess of xxx”.

I think it is properly HRH Prince/Princess xxx, Prince/Princess of Sweden, Duke/Duchess of xxx, the reason being that prior to 1982 the formal title of princes of the Swedish Royal House was HRH Prince xxx, Sweden's Arvfurste, Duke of xxx.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

When the King of Sweden gave titles to the children of his second daughter a third of the forums raged, one third cheered and one third remained indifferent. It's hard to please everyone.

Did they react that way because they didn't like the kings decision or was it because his second daughter doesn't have a positive reputation and they don't like the decision because they don't like her. what was the reaction when he gave titles to the children of his son.

While composing an answer to KellyAtLast's question, I thought I would also look at the reaction on the forums when other children of (younger) sons were given royal titles.

*Prince Félix and Prince Louis of Luxembourg were living outside of the country when their children were given royal titles, the same as King of Sweden's younger daughter.


First child of Prince Carl Philip of Sweden: No negative reactions to the child's royal title.

Princess Sofia is Expecting - Due April 2016
A Boy for Carl Philip and Sofia - Alexander Erik Hubertus Bertil: April 19, 2016

First child of Prince Félix of Luxembourg*: No negative reactions to the child's royal title.

Félix and Claire Expecting First Child
A Girl for Félix and Claire - Amalia Gabriela Maria Teresa: June 15, 2014

Children of Prince Louis of Luxembourg*: No negative reactions to the children being given titles. There is one comment suggesting they should have been created counts instead of princes, but most reactions are extremely positive about the royal titles.

New Titles for Tessy, Gabriel and Noah de Nassau: June 23, 2009

First child from the second marriage of Prince Joachim of Denmark: No negative reactions to the child's royal title.

Princess Marie is Pregnant!
Baby Boy for Princess Marie and Prince Joachim: May 4, 2009

First child of Prince Laurent of Belgium: No negative reactions to the child's royal title.

Princess Claire Pregnant
A Daughter for Laurent and Claire

I limited myself to the European royal families, but I would be interested to know about reactions to other families.

 

[Nice Nofret]

Apart from the british royals the other european ones are much less under scrutiny - so a royal titel is much less a burden than in britain.

 

[Mbruno]

Recently I posted a summary table of British royal and noble titles and styles to the "Questions about British Styles and Titles" forum.

Similarly, I have been also working on tables for Spanish and (French-language) Belgian royal and noble titles and styles , but that is still a work in progress and the information therein has not been fully verified as in the British case. The attached files show what I have got so far.

The summary tables are written respectively in Spanish and French (as I did not want to mix languages in the tables), but the explanatory comments that follow the tables are written in English so that all forum members can read them. I apologize in advance if I made any spelling, grammar or semantic mistake in French or in Spanish (those are not my native languages).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Recently I posted a summary table of British royal and noble titles and styles to the "Questions about British Styles and Titles" forum.

Similarly, I have been also working on tables for Spanish and (French-language) Belgian royal and noble titles and styles , but that is still a work in progress and the information therein has not been fully verified as in the British case. The attached files show what I have got so far.

The summary tables are written respectively in Spanish and French (as I did not want to mix languages in the tables), but the explanatory comments that follow the tables are written in English so that all forum members can read them. I apologize in advance if I made any spelling, grammar or semantic mistake in French or in Spanish (those are not my native languages).

Thank you very much for doing this! As always, I greatly appreciate your effort to be both explanatory and accurate.

I can't be of much assistance with the noble forms of address, but in the thread on Belgian titles I've previously shared a few examples of how wives of Princes of Belgium who were not created Princesses of Belgium themselves are formally styled. In summary, there are two styles that the Belgian court applies in these cases:

1. HRH Princess Amedeo of Belgium, with HRH and "of Belgium" but without the wife's own forename or surname.
2. Princess Elisabetta (Rosboch von Wolkenstein), with the wife's own forename (and, if desired, surname) but with neither HRH nor "of Belgium".

Since I don't recall sharing this link in the Belgian thread, here is an article which quotes a Palace press announcement in which she was styled Princess Elisabetta Maria Rosboch von Wolkenstein.

It occurred to me as I read your summaries that many of the rules you have listed for the royal families are recent inventions (e.g. the treatment of Infantas and their spouses has only been the general rule for one generation, since Pilar and Margarita's unequal marriages were exceptions to the rules in place at the time). It has become a knotty exercise to describe the rules of European royal titles, as they have undergone many rapid changes over the last few decades.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Herman II of Baden was the first to use the title of "Margrave of Baden" in 1112.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=morganatic+marriage+meaning

Morganatic marriage, legally valid marriage between a male member of a sovereign, princely, or noble house and a woman of lesser birth or rank, with the provision that she shall not thereby accede to his rank and that the children of the marriage shall not succeed to their father’s hereditary dignities, fiefs, and entailed property.

Actually, the term "morganatic marriage" is also used to describe such marriages between female members of a sovereign or noble house and men of lesser birth or rank. While this usage is apparently uncommon in Britain I have observed it used in books and articles about marriages of German and Italian princesses.

 

[0325.Mikael.0929]

Lately there has been discussion over the name of the royal house of Sweden in the third child of Prince Carl Philip and Princess Sofia thread. As I want to stick with the topic, I would like to share a few thoughts about it:

Not all royal/noble house share the same membership rules. The right to interpret the rules lies in the hands of the head of the house, not a mere monarch who happens to belong to the house.

The reason why Frederik and Joachim are not considered a part of the House of Oldenburg or Glücksborg is because Margrethe II is neither the head of the House of Oldenburg nor of the House of Glücksborg, and she has no right to amend the rules to include Frederik and Joachim. Their house would by default be Monpezat.

Similarly, Victoria is not the head of the house of Hanover either and got the British throne due to British, not Hanoverian, rules. Edward VII was hence by default a member of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, not Hanover.

George V, however, founded the House of Windsor, whose membership follows British rules, and that's why Elizabeth II, not the Duke of Gloucester, is the head of the house of Windsor, and her descendants are also members of the House of Windsor (though this thread has "Non-British" in it, the British house name is not a main point in this post)

Similarly, Carl XVI Gustaf is the head of the House of Bernadotte through a line of firstborns (except Oscar II and himself), and reserves the right to decide who is a member of the House of Bernadotte and who is not. Sweden listed in its royal family website that Estelle, the first child of the first heiress apparent under AP, is a member of the House of Bernadotte.

Albert I of Belgium founded the House of Belgium and its current head is King Philippe. He reserves the right to declare whether Princess Elisabeth's children will be a member of the House of Belgium.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I am not sure if you are talking of legal rights or moral rights, so I will also share my thoughts on both.

Under Danish, German, or EU law, the head of the house of Oldenburg and/or Glücksburg is not recognized as an authority over Denmark or the Danish royal family, and he has no legal rights to prescribe or interpret the rules for the naming or membership of the Danish royal house. That remains the prerogative of Denmark's sovereign.

As of ten years ago, the official website of Crown Prince Frederik stated: "The day Crown Prince Frederik ascends the throne of Denmark he will be the sixth monarch in the line of Glücksborg, a family which took the Danish throne when Christian IX was crowned after Frederik VII died without an heir in 1863." So far there is no indication that this decision has been changed.

In regards to moral rights, my position is that reigning monarchs ought to shape their decisions by the values of their own realm in preference to the values of distant cousins in a foreign country, and that women and their descendants must not be treated less favorably than men and their descendants. We do not need to agree with each other, of course.

Albert I of Belgium founded the House of Belgium and its current head is King Philippe. He reserves the right to declare whether Princess Elisabeth's children will be a member of the House of Belgium.

Due to the changes of 2015 the Belgian royal house is once more officially known as the House of Saxe-Coburg.

https://www.monarchie.be/en/royal-family/history/origins-of-the-dynasty
https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...elgian-royal-family-38975-17.html#post2186636

 

[0325.Mikael.0929]

In regards to moral rights, my position is that reigning monarchs ought to shape their decisions by the values of their own realm in preference to the values of distant cousins in a foreign country, and that women and their descendants must not be treated less favorably than men and their descendants. We do not need to agree with each other, of course.

I agree. The House of Bernadotte, as a royal and sovereign dynasty that was founded in Sweden in the 1810s, does not listen to orders from a higher authority to determine who belongs to their own house, because sovereignty means "supreme authority" and the House of Bernadotte themselves is already one. There is no higher authority than the House of Bernadotte (which is also the sovereign, royal house of Sweden) to interpret who is a member of the house.

https://www.kungahuset.se/royalcour...dottedynasty.4.396160511584257f218000814.html
This page is the official and probably the most reliable source on who is a member of the House of Bernadotte (excluding descendants of the Counts of Wisborg who weren't born Royal).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Some monarchical constitutions use the word "King" to refer to the Head of State probably because they were originally written at a time when only men could succeed to the throne. That is definitely the case for example in Belgium, Denmark and Norway.

I'm not sure that is the reason why. The majority of current European monarchical constitutions involved male-preference or gender-equal primogeniture when they were originally written. Only the constitutions of Liechtenstein, Norway, Sweden, and Belgium were originally written to have male-only primogeniture.

But with the exception of Sweden's, all European monarchical constitutions use the word King, Grand Duke, Fürst or Prince in most or all references to the Head of State. The Spanish constitution's reference to "the Queen consort or the consort of the Queen" and the provisions of the Danish and Norwegian Constitutions that govern succession to the throne are the only places which use the feminine title.

In English, before usage moved on, masculine pronouns and forms of titles were accepted as gender neutral if used without reference to a specific person ("When an ambassador pays a visit to the Palace, he is welcomed"). I believe that principle also applied to other Western European languages, and suspect the use of masculine titles in the constitutions was the result.

Interestingly, most job titles in English have shifted to fully gender-neutral use of the masculine form. A woman ambassador is now always referred to as an ambassador and not an ambassadress, for instance. Should the shift eventually expand to royal titles it is possible that King and Prince could become gender-neutral titles in the distant future.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Princess Maria Laura's official style will certainly continue to be HRH Princess Maria Laura, in the same way that her mother (since the succession changes of 1991) is officially styled as HRH Princess Astrid, Princess of Belgium.

https://www.monarchie.be/en/royal-family/princess-astrid

However, if Laura and William continue to live in Britain, I wonder if she will call herself Mrs. Isvy in private life, in accordance with British custom.

Most likely she will remain known as prinses Maria Laura, like her aunts are always referred to as prinses Marie-Christine, prinses Maria Esmeralda and prinses Margareta. Her sister-in-law is usually mentioned as prinses Elisabetta.

Who is Margareta? But yes, the Palace refers to her great-aunts as Princess Esmeralda and Princess Marie-Christine. However, Esmeralda (who lives in England) and Marie-Christine (who lives in the United States) use their husbands' surnames in their private lives.

Her mother Princess Astrid, who as I said above is known officially as HRH Princess Astrid, and who lives in Belgium, does not use her husband's surname and signs her correspondence "Astrid of Belgium".

Margareta is a daughter of Maria Laura's Luxembourg grandparents Jean and Joséphine-Charlotte. She is married to a Liechtenstein Prince but usually she is popularly referred to as prinses Margareta. The three Benelux countries are very similar, due to shared history. The three younger daughters of Queen Juliana, irrespective their husbands' surnames and eventual titles kept their known style too. Like in Belgium and Luxembourg they also remained known as prinses Irene, prinses Margriet, prinses Christina as that simply is their commonly known style, for a lifetime.

But the reigning houses of Luxembourg and Liechtenstein differ from the royal houses of Belgium and the Netherlands when it comes to the styles of princesses of the blood who have married.

In Luxembourg, princesses of the blood who are married to untitled men, for example Princess Marie-Gabrielle of Nassau, keep their style. But princesses of the blood who are married to titled men, such as Margaretha, use the titles of their husbands (although they retain their own titles as well). For instance, Margaretha is referred to by the Grand-Ducal Court as HRH Princess Margaretha of Liechtenstein (not of Luxembourg).

https://monarchie.lu/fr/actualites/retrouvailles-familiales-au-chateau-de-berg

In Liechtenstein, most princesses of the blood adopt the style of their husband even if he is untitled. Note how the Liechtenstein government goes about naming Maria Pia, a princess who serves as an ambassador and is married to Mr. Max Kothbauer.


https://www.llv.li/inhalt/114772/amtsstellen/wien

Wien

Botschafterin

I.D. Maria-Pia Kothbauer Prinzessin von und zu Liechtenstein,

als nicht residierende Botschafterin für die Tschechische Republik akkreditiert​

 

[Mbruno]

But the reigning houses of Luxembourg and Liechtenstein differ from the royal houses of Belgium and the Netherlands when it comes to the styles of princesses of the blood who have married.

In Luxembourg, princesses of the blood who are married to untitled men, for example Princess Marie-Gabrielle of Nassau, keep their style. But princesses of the blood who are married to titled men, such as Margaretha, use the titles of their husbands (although they retain their own titles as well). For instance, Margaretha is referred to by the Grand-Ducal Court as HRH Princess Margaretha of Liechtenstein (not of Luxembourg).

https://monarchie.lu/fr/actualites/retrouvailles-familiales-au-chateau-de-berg

In Liechtenstein, most princesses of the blood adopt the style of their husband even if he is untitled. Note how the Liechtenstein government goes about naming Maria Pia, a princess who serves as an ambassador and is married to Mr. Max Kothbauer.


https://www.llv.li/inhalt/114772/amtsstellen/wien

Wien

Botschafterin

I.D. Maria-Pia Kothbauer Prinzessin von und zu Liechtenstein,

als nicht residierende Botschafterin für die Tschechische Republik akkreditiert​

Isn't it the norm that princesses of the blood adopt their husbands' titles when they marry into a foreign royal family? Princess Alexandra of Denmark for example was known as HRH The Princess of Wales in the United Kingdom although I believe she never ceased to be a Princess of Denmark in her native country. Conversely, the Princess Royal became HRH Princess Frederick William of Prussia and later HRH The Crown Princess of Prussia upon marriage.

I believe a princess of the blood only keeps her original title when she marries a man of lower standing/ dignity. Is that correct?

Similarly, Carl XVI Gustaf is the head of the House of Bernadotte through a line of firstborns (except Oscar II and himself), and reserves the right to decide who is a member of the House of Bernadotte and who is not. Sweden listed in its royal family website that Estelle, the first child of the first heiress apparent under AP, is a member of the House of Bernadotte.
.

That is controversial. Estelle does not use a family name (that has been confirmed, I think, by the Royal Court) but her father officially changed his name to Olaf Daniel Westling Bernadotte. On the other hand, according to the recent report of the constitutional commitee of the Swedish Parliament, the term "Royal House" as used in the Instrument of Government (when referring for example to the extinction of the Royal House) or, indeed, in the Act of Succession when referring to "princes or princesses of the Royal House" means all persons in the line of succession. Swedish law regulates who is in the line of succession, but it does not regulate the titles and styles of members of the Royal House explicitly. The constitutional committee understood in its reports that this is a prerogative of the King as Head of the Royal House, but not as head of the House of Bernadotte as the two things are not necessarily the same.

There is no doubt that, when King Carl Gustaf dies, Victoria will be the Queen of Sweden (assuming the monarchy is not abolished) and also the Head of the Royal House of Sweden. I suppose she will be also considered in practice the Head of the House of Bernadotte although, technically, that position should be held by her brother Carl Phlip and is separate from the Swedish laws of succession to the throne.

Personally I lean on the position that, especially in this new era of equal primogeniture, it is better to stick with the notion of Royal House of a country X (e.g. the Royal House of Sweden, the Royal House of Belgium, etc.) rather than linking the Royal House to a particular family name like Bernadotte, or Monpezat, or Glücksburg.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Isn't it the norm that princesses of the blood adopt their husbands' titles when they marry into a foreign royal family? Princess Alexandra of Denmark for example was known as HRH The Princess of Wales in the United Kingdom although I believe she never ceased to be a Princess of Denmark in her native country. Conversely, the Princess Royal became HRH Princess Frederick William of Prussia and later HRH The Crown Princess of Prussia upon marriage.

I would go a step further to observe that it is the international, albeit not universal, norm that wives marry into their husbands' families instead of the other way around. In consequence, married women are normally known by names or titles arising from their husbands' families.

That norm extends to European royal-royal marriages, as your examples illustrate. But one does encounter different customs when one delves into individual royal houses and periods of history, particularly with regard to exceptional situations such as princesses who marry men of lower than accepted standing or princesses whose husbands marry into the families of their wives. For instance, until several generations ago, princesses of the blood in many European royal houses would have been revoked of their original titles upon concluding a marriage to a commoner.

I believe a princess of the blood only keeps her original title when she marries a man of lower standing/ dignity. Is that correct?

Currently, the norm in the Belgian, Swedish, and Danish monarchies has princesses of the blood continue to be known by their original titles after marriage, even in the event that the husband has a claim to a royal title which his wife could conceivably use. Astrid of Belgium is referred to officially as HRH Princess Astrid, though her husband's title of pretense of Archduke of Austria-Este was recognized in Belgium. (Of course, her case is slightly different as her husband is also known as HRH Prince Lorenz, having been created a Prince of Belgium.) Birgitta of Sweden is referred to officially as HRH Princess Birgitta, in the same manner as other princesses and princes of the Swedish royal house, whereas her late husband was referred to by the Swedish court as a Prince of Hohenzollern. Likewise, Benedikte of Denmark is referred to by the Danish royal house as HRH Princess Benedikte, in contrast to her late husband who was referred to as a Prince zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg.

In other European royal houses, princesses of the blood whose husbands are titled in their own right continue with the old norm of using the titles of their husbands. Among other examples, Marie-Gabrielle of Luxembourg is known as HRH Countess Marie-Gabrielle Holstein-Ledreborg, and Caroline of Monaco as HRH the Princess of Hanover.

Liechtenstein takes it further as even Liechtenstein princesses who are married to commoners normally adopt the style of their husbands (HSH Tatjana von Lattorff). That is also the case in the United Kingdom, except that British princesses combine their original title with the style they adopt from their husbands (HRH Princess Beatrice, Mrs. Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi).

 

[Somebody]

In the case of Benedikte it is interesting that Anne-Marie is also referred to without designation but her title of 'Dronning" certainly isn't her Danish title...

 

[Tatiana Maria]

In the case of Benedikte it is interesting that Anne-Marie is also referred to without designation but her title of 'Dronning" certainly isn't her Danish title...

I suspect that is influenced by the dispute between Greece, which has repealed the royal titles of the former king and his family, and the family, which refuses to acknowledge the repeal. Using the titles of King and Queen without the territorial designation "of Greece" seems like a compromise.

Similarly, Carl XVI Gustaf is the head of the House of Bernadotte through a line of firstborns (except Oscar II and himself), and reserves the right to decide who is a member of the House of Bernadotte and who is not. Sweden listed in its royal family website that Estelle, the first child of the first heiress apparent under AP, is a member of the House of Bernadotte.

That is controversial. Estelle does not use a family name (that has been confirmed, I think, by the Royal Court) but her father officially changed his name to Olaf Daniel Westling Bernadotte. On the other hand, according to the recent report of the constitutional commitee of the Swedish Parliament, the term "Royal House" as used in the Instrument of Government (when referring for example to the extinction of the Royal House) or, indeed, in the Act of Succession when referring to "princes or princesses of the Royal House" means all persons in the line of succession. Swedish law regulates who is in the line of succession, but it does not regulate the titles and styles of members of the Royal House explicitly. The constitutional committee understood in its reports that this is a prerogative of the King as Head of the Royal House, but not as head of the House of Bernadotte as the two things are not necessarily the same.

There is no doubt that, when King Carl Gustaf dies, Victoria will be the Queen of Sweden (assuming the monarchy is not abolished) and also the Head of the Royal House of Sweden. I suppose she will be also considered in practice the Head of the House of Bernadotte although, technically, that position should be held by her brother Carl Phlip and is separate from the Swedish laws of succession to the throne.

Personally I lean on the position that, especially in this new era of equal primogeniture, it is better to stick with the notion of Royal House of a country X (e.g. the Royal House of Sweden, the Royal House of Belgium, etc.) rather than linking the Royal House to a particular family name like Bernadotte, or Monpezat, or Glücksburg.

What is controversial? Mikael's comment was that on the Swedish royal family website Princess Estelle is listed as a member of the House of Bernadotte, which is factual:

Sveriges Kungahus tillhör ätten Bernadotte, som sedan över 200 år sitter på Sveriges tron.

Det Kungl. Huset utgörs av

[...]
H.K.H. Prinsessan Estelle (f. 2012)
[...]
​

Translation:

The Royal House of Sweden belongs to the house of Bernadotte, which has occupied the throne of Sweden for over 200 years.

The Royal House consists of

[...]
H.R.H. Princess Estelle (born 2012)
[...]
​

It is true that Estelle uses an asterisk in place of a surname in the national register, but that is also true for every other member of the Royal House with the exception of her father. (Nonetheless, Bernadotte is regarded as their legal surname: The naming law would not have allowed Daniel to adopt Bernadotte as his surname had it not been the surname of his wife.)

Had Carl Philip remained Crown Prince and succeeded as King, I doubt his position as head of the house of Bernadotte and the right of his descendants to maintain the particular family name of Bernadotte for the Royal House would be questioned. If the same is or will be controversial for Victoria of Sweden or Margrethe II of Denmark, then that is, truthfully, purely on the basis of their sex.

 

[Somebody]

I suspect that is influenced by the dispute between Greece, which has repealed the royal titles of the former king and his family, and the family, which refuses to acknowledge the repeal. Using the titles of King and Queen without the territorial designation "of Greece" seems like a compromise.

But that's not the case: Konstantin is referred to as 'of Greece'. Only Anne-Marie is not referred to as of Greece. Your earlier argument for Benedikte was that this was a sign that she is still referred to by her original Danish title but the pattern is the same for Benedikte and Anne-Marie, while Anne-Marie is acknowledge as 'queen', which refers to her Greek, not to her Danish title.

See (from earlier link):

Hendes Kongelige Højhed Prinsesse Benedikte
Hans Højhed Prins Richard zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg
Hendes Majestæt Dronning Anne-Marie
Hans Majestæt Kong Konstantin II af Grækenland

 

[Stefan]

But that's not the case: Konstantin is referred to as 'of Greece'. Only Anne-Marie is not referred to as of Greece. Your earlier argument for Benedikte was that this was a sign that she is still referred to by her original Danish title but the pattern is the same for Benedikte and Anne-Marie, while Anne-Marie is acknowledge as 'queen', which refers to her Greek, not to her Danish title.

See (from earlier link):

But then the use a wrong Title for Konstantin as his title was King of the Hellenes not of Greece.

 

[Somebody]

But then the use a wrong Title for Konstantin as his title was King of the Hellenes not of Greece.

I know but it said 'af Graekenland', I don't know what 'of the Hellenes' would be in Danish.

 

[JR76]

I know but it said 'af Graekenland', I don't know what 'of the Hellenes' would be in Danish.

Something like Hellenernes dronning or Grækernes dronning.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Greece is still -officially- the Hellenic Republic, but everyone says "the President of Greece".

Like Switzerland officially is the Swiss Confederation, the Confoederatio Helveticae (therefore their car licence plates with CH), but everyone says "the President of Switzerland".

Usually it was:

The King of the Hellenes
The Queen of the Hellenes
Prince [name] of Greece and Denmark
Princess [name] of Greece and Denmark

 

[Tatiana Maria]

But that's not the case: Konstantin is referred to as 'of Greece'. Only Anne-Marie is not referred to as of Greece. Your earlier argument for Benedikte was that this was a sign that she is still referred to by her original Danish title but the pattern is the same for Benedikte and Anne-Marie, while Anne-Marie is acknowledge as 'queen', which refers to her Greek, not to her Danish title.

See (from earlier link):

Hendes Kongelige Højhed Prinsesse Benedikte
Hans Højhed Prins Richard zu Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg
Hendes Majestæt Dronning Anne-Marie
Hans Majestæt Kong Konstantin II af Grækenland

My apologies, I did miss that. That introduces more ambiguity to the guestlist.

But in Princess Benedikte's biography on the royal family website, it is her title Princess to Denmark which is mentioned, so I think it does take precedence.

http://kongehuset.dk/den-kongelige-familie/hkh-prinsesse-benedikte

Usually it was:

[...]
Prince [name] of Greece and Denmark
Princess [name] of Greece and Denmark

It was usually Prince or Princess [name] without a designation when within Greece, and "of Greece" when overseas.

Prince Philip of Greece, serving as a British navy officer in the second world war, signed his name "Philip, Prince of Greece".

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...ge-life-profile-of-prince-philip-1563268.html

 

[CyrilVladisla]

King Joseph I of Portugal succeeded to the throne in 1750. His eldest daughter Maria Francisca was proclaimed Princess of Brazil.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

That is a point I don't get when people raise it. Having HRH status never implied an obligation to work for the monarch. Historically, it only signaled a certain degree of kinship to a Sovereign (or being the wife or widow of someone who holds that status).

Yes, but the argument is not that royal titles were historically tied to an obligation to work for the monarch, but that going forward they ought to be.

There are current circumstances, present in most European monarchies, which I think make the limitation of royal titles to "working royals" an attractive proposal:

1. The expectation that royal family members who do not work for the monarchy will enter the labor force to earn a living, rather than relying on taxpayer resources or even private trust funds.

2. The expansion of the pool of professions undertaken by royal family members, and the perception that a royal title is an unfair advantage of many if not most such professions.

3. The responsibilities, limitations, and scrutiny which are now tied to royal titles, and their potential to conflict with a professional career.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

In medieval Serbia, the rank of the boyars was equivalent in the rank of the baron, meaning "free warrior", it was the first rank after the non-free peasants or serfs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyar#Boyars_in_Serbia

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Yes, but the argument is not that royal titles were historically tied to an obligation to work for the monarch, but that going forward they ought to be.

There are current circumstances, present in most European monarchies, which I think make the limitation of royal titles to "working royals" an attractive proposal:

1. The expectation that royal family members who do not work for the monarchy will enter the labor force to earn a living, rather than relying on taxpayer resources or even private trust funds.

2. The expansion of the pool of professions undertaken by royal family members, and the perception that a royal title is an unfair advantage of many if not most such professions.

3. The responsibilities, limitations, and scrutiny which are now tied to royal titles, and their potential to conflict with a professional career.

That’s precisely the issue today with royal titles.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

In general in Scandinavia at the time a wife would be known by her husband's profession and his last name, but never by his first name. For example Fru Overlæge Mortensen (Mrs Chief Physician Mortensen) or Fru Kabinettssekreterare Knutsson (Mrs State Secretary Knutsson) with neither her nor her husbands first name mentioned. Once the increasingly unmanageable Swedish system of styling (called the Swedish style plague) started reforming during the same period the titles were often ditched and instead the common way of styling were Mr & Mrs Mortensen and Mr & Mrs Knutsson.

Thank you for this explanation. When the style of "Princess Ragnhild, Mrs. Lorentzen" was adopted by the Norwegian and Swedish courts for princesses whose marriages were designated as unequal, beginning with Ragnhild of Norway in 1953 and ending with Christina of Sweden in 1974, why were their husbands' professions never included in the style?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Why is it that people in royal watching communities sometimes acknowledge and sometimes refuse to acknowledge decisions taken by reigning monarchs to strip titles from their family members? For example:

King George V of Great Britain stripped the royal titles from various members of his family in 1917. For example, Prince Louis of Battenberg was demoted to Lord Louis Mountbatten. When people today reference Louis's daughter Pamela, they call her Lady Pamela Hicks, not Princess Pamela of Battenberg, in accordance with the decision of King George V.

Queen Maria II of Portugal stripped the royal titles of her uncle Miguel. When he subsequently married, she naturally did not confer titles on his wife and children. But even today, people usually refer to Miguel's children and grandchildren as Infantas and royal dukes, in defiance of the decision of Queen Maria II.

Why is it that most royal watchers recognize (for example) King George V's decision to strip his family's titles as valid, but still refuse to recognize (for example) Queen Maria II's decision to strip her uncle's titles? This has always puzzled me.