|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Oct 14, 2015 22:36:59 GMT
I posted this question a long time ago and got no reply I am trying it again.
My question, is about royal houses versus royal familes I am interested in knowing the different between them.
Both Norway and the Netherlands makes a distinction between both.
In Norway His Highness Prince Sverre Magnus is only a HH will he be upgrade to a full HRH when his father becomes king from what I read only the king queen crown prince and crown princes and the crown princes heir, Her Royal Highness Princess Ingrid Alexandra are members of the Royal house and are titled HRH. and that HH Prices Sverre Magnus is not as of right now. I did note Her Highness Princess Märtha Louise the king daughter was a HRH before how did she qualify and not Prices Sverre Magnus. I noted she gave up the title for business reason and became a HH why was she made a HRH at birth and Prince Sverre Magnus was not.
I do find the system in the Netherlands even more confusing to as to who is part of the royal house versus royal family and having to be related to the king with in three degrees of kinship to the monarch to be in the line of succession. it includes the king the queen the former Queen all the kings daughters.
I see in Demark the grandsons and granddaughter of the Queens sons are only HH why is that when there father is a HRH
Is there othere countires that hae simlar rules
if anyone has more details I love to read it
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Oct 10, 2014 20:40:36 GMT
Great subject I pesonaly hate it when I see the media use the word recycled clothing eveytime a royal lady use a outfit twice, how can a brand new thousand of dollars designer outfit be recycled when it has only be worn once or twice.
I like when I see them reuse there clothing it shows they know how much the outfit cost the state and want to use them and get value out of it. I never hear the media tell the royal men how often they have worn that suit before. its all about the fashion business making money.
I know no one in real life who can buy an outfit and only use it once, most of these fancy outfits for state events are owed and paid for by the state and they should be reused to get value out of them.
The media have no sense Hello magazine makes me mad every time I see them write the Duchess of Cambridge has recycled her outfit and then go on to show that last photo of her wearing the outfit just to shame her and maker her look to cheap to buy a new outfit.
Instead they should saying the modern royals are right to be reusing the clothes they have and saving the taxpayer dollars. the younger royals, are right to not follow this idea of only wearing items once.
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Mar 3, 2014 23:38:40 GMT
Gentlemen you both may be able to answer this question, about royal house versus royal family I am interested in knowing the different between it. Both Norway and the Netherlands make a distinction between both. In Norway His Highness Prince Sverre Magnus is only a HH will he be upgrade to a full HRH when his father becomes king from what I read only the king queen crown prince and crown princes and the crown princes heir, Her Royal Highness Princess Ingrid Alexandra are members of the house and are titled HRH. and that Prices Sverre Magnus is not as of right now. I did note Her Highness Princess Märtha Louise the king daughter was a HRH before how did she qualify and not Prices Sverre Magnus I noted she gave up the title for business reason and became a HH why was she made a HRH at birth and Prince Sverre Magnus was not.
I do find the system in the Netherlands more confusing to as to who is part of the royal house versus royal family and having to be related to the king with in three degrees of kinship to the monarch to be in the line of succession. it includes the king the queen the former Queen all the kings daughters.
if anyone has more details I love to read it
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Feb 28, 2014 1:02:24 GMT
I take it as a nod to the Swedish belief of men and women being equal, they made Crown Princess Victoria heir over Prince Carl Philip who was born as the crown prince and was such for a year. They did it because she was first born, her daughter Estelle was made a princess as her mother was the current heir and Princess Estelle is her mothers heir. The King made Victoria husband Prince Daniel a prince too. The king is the font of all honors in most counties.
When Prince Carl Philip marries his children will be prince and princesses of Sweden as right of there father being a prince of Sweden. So I think the king believes that Princess Madeleine children should be treated the same as Crown Princess Victoria and Prince Carl Philips children who will be born as prince and princesses of Sweden he has gone one step further and made sure the children of Princess Madeline have the same rights. I think it a cool thing for women's rights
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Jan 27, 2014 21:45:10 GMT
I like the upgrade it nice and clean
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Jun 7, 2013 23:48:12 GMT
Thank you so much Cinderella for the link, I knew you would know where to find it.
I am so looking forward to the wedding to see the ceremony and to see all the royal glamor that only a wedding brings out
thanks again
margaret
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Jun 7, 2013 15:59:31 GMT
I am looking for links on the Swedish TV site that will be showing the royal wedding. So I can watch the wedding tomorrow on the Internet. I believe its the same TV station that did Victoria wedding and I was able to watch and view her wedding online, but they don't seem to have links posted for tomorrow wedding. I have searched and goggled but cant find a link posted even on the TV station web page if someone has one please post. thanks
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Feb 28, 2013 0:14:53 GMT
Wow no idea there was so many just in the British royal family alone, that one of Prince Harry and his great great grandmother should be able to rest any question that he was James Hewitt son, he a clone of her
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Feb 27, 2013 16:12:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Jan 11, 2013 14:39:37 GMT
Many thanks for your reply and information
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Jan 11, 2013 0:50:03 GMT
'The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm dated 31 December 2012 to declare that all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales should have and enjoy the style, title and attribute of Royal Highness with the titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their Christian names or with such other titles of honour.' I have some questions on the above announcement that TRH the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge children will all receive the HRH title now and will be know as HRH and princes and princesses at birth. There most likely to called HRH the Prince x of Cambridge or HRH the Princess X of Cambridge. Under the old 1917 letters of patent by George V only the first great grandson of the Queen as the monarch, would have received the title of Prince and the HRH title as a direct male line descendant of the monarch in line of succession. I also believe under the same 1917 patent any girls born to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge would have been born commoners and would only be entitled to be addressed and styled only as lady X as the daughter of a Duke and and that any other sons born to the duke would only have the style of maybe Lord Windsor as the sons of a duke if the letters patent was not updated, and they would then have had to wait for there grandfather or father to became king for them to received the title of Princess and Prince and HRH but now all children born will be so titled. is this correct? This letter patent is similar I think to the one done in 1948 or 1949 by King George VI to allow the heirs of his daughter Princess Elizabeth to have her children born as HRH and princes and princesses as there father had given up his royal titles as HRH Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark, and they would be born as commoners and it was not thought appropriate to have the heirs of the throne born as such. When Prince Philip married Princess Elizabeth he received only the HRH title from the King why did the king not also make him a prince as well at the time, anyone know why he was not made a prince? The King knew that Philip and princess Elizabeth would have children so the king had to know they would be born commoners and styled as the children of a Duke without making Philip a prince, so why did he decide to fix this by letter patent making the future children HRH and princes and princesses but not make Philip a prince, its does not make sense to have his children as royal prince and princess with the HRH title and he was only made a HRH? And why then did Philip have to wait until the Queen decide to make him a prince once again in 1956? On the current letters patent as the queen is in great heath there is the major possibility she will be around to see Prince Harry marry she has made no provision under this letter patent for his children to have the HRH title and be princes and princess while she is still alive. I believe they will then fall under the 1917 patent and will have to wait for Princes Charles to be king before they will receive those titles as grandchildren of the sovereign is that correct? so they will be born commoners, that is unless the queen make new letters patent to cover them before they are born to make them prince and princess is this correct? If anyone has more information on this process, I love to hear it or if I have made errors on what I have said above please let me know. I would be very interested to know more on letters patents www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2259712/The-Queen-declares-future-Royal-daughter-Duke-Duchess-Princess--But-dont-know-boy-girl.htmlPlease noted I have never linked to a news link before online so Cinderella, if I have linked incorrectly please fill free to delete my link. I don't want to violate copyright law or cause issues for your web page
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Jan 10, 2013 22:57:24 GMT
Yes I would like to add my thanks for this site too, its been a joy in my life since 2003 not a day goes by, that I don't hurry here to check out the news and the posts thanks Cinderella your amazing for the work you put in here best wishes Dame Margaret
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Oct 22, 2012 21:44:13 GMT
Thank you sir, for taking the time to give me that information a most interesting and informative reply
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Oct 21, 2012 19:20:15 GMT
Again thanks to Miss Cinderella for posting viewing info on the wedding I enjoyed watching it what a lovely couple they looked so in love and what a dress she going to be a Hugh royal star looking forward to seeing her on the international stage
|
|
|
Post by Dame Margaret of Fermoy on Oct 21, 2012 19:16:08 GMT
Question for the law experts here why was the civil ceremony held the day before and not on the same day as a church service is the church service not legal in Luxemburg.
Or if they have to have two ceremony's why not do them the same day? its seem weird to have to get married two days in a row.
I noted the same thing when the wedding was held in Monaco civil service day before there too, and the church service next day, do not remember what happened in Sweden if they had to have a separate civil service there or if the church service was enough once they signed the marriage register. In the UK it was all done at the church service and they signed the register
Just would be interested on hearing what the legal requirements are for these and all royal family weddings around the world
|
|