Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Royal Questions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Royal Questions

    So in reading a lineage line of the royal family, I saw this:

    1. HRH The Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales
    2. HRH Prince William of Wales (son of Prince Charles)
    3. HRH Prince Henry of Wales (son of Prince Charles)
    4. HRH The Prince Andrew, The Duke of York, (second son-brother to Prince Charles)
    5. HRH Princess Beatrice of York (daughter of Prince Andrew)
    6. HRH Princess Eugenie of York (daughter of Prince Andrew)
    7. HRH The Prince Edward, The Earl of Wessex (third son-brother to Prince Charles)
    8. Lady Louise Alice Elizabeth Mary Mountbatten Windsor (daughter of Prince Edward)
    9. HRH The Princess Anne (only daughter to Queen Elizabeth)
    10. Peter Phillips (son of Princess Anne)
    11. Zara Phillips (daughter of Princess Anne)
    Here are my questions:

    Why does Charles get Wales, Andrew-York and Edward get Wessex?
    What is the difference between a Prince, Duke and Earl?
    Why are Prince Charles sons heir to the throne prior to Prince Charles brothers and sister?
    Why would Prince Edwards daughter be heir prior to Princess Anne, who is more closely related to Queen Elizabeth that the grandchildren are?



    That's all I got for now...I'll come up with more later I am sure.
    "To dream of the person you would like to be is to waste the person you are."-Sholem Asch

    "I always turn to the sports page first, which records people's accomplishments. The front page has nothing but man's failures."-Earl Warren

    "I didn't intend for this to take on a political tone. I'm just here for the drugs."-Nancy Reagan, when asked a political question at a "Just Say No" rally

    "He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules."-Earl Butz, on the Pope's attitude toward birth control

  • #2
    Let's see.
    Charles gets Wales because the first son always does. IIRC it was a way of legitmising the crowns claim over Wales when they invaded. He also gets the Duchy of Cornwall, from which his revenue comes.
    York and Wessex are Ducal titles taken into the Royal Family from previous marriages and 'acquisitions', and get trotted out according to how many sons there are.

    The line of inheritance follows the male line of eldest son/daughter if no sons, so William and Harry outrank Edward and Andrew.
    Notice Edward and Andrew's children are princesses but Anne's children are not.

    The line of descent to Edwards daughter would require the following people to die. Elizabeth, Charles, William, Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward.
    For Anne to inherit it would be Elizabeth, Charles, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Louise.

    A Prince/Princess is of royal descent, A Duke, Earl, Marquess, Viscount etc are Peers. (i.e. someone of sufficient quality/money/power to be worthy for a Royal to associate with)

    Edit: Dukes are of Royal blood, Earls and below can be elevated from the masses
    Last edited by Parihaka; 03 Jul 07,, 03:40.
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
      Let's see.
      Charles gets Wales because the first son always does. IIRC it was a way of legitmising the crowns claim over Wales when they invaded. He also gets the Duchy of Cornwall, from which his revenue comes.
      York and Wessex are Ducal titles taken into the Royal Family from previous marriages and 'acquisitions', and get trotted out according to how many sons there are.

      The line of inheritance follows the male line of eldest son/daughter if no sons, so William and Harry outrank Edward and Andrew.
      Notice Edward and Andrew's children are princesses but Anne's children are not.

      The line of descent to Edwards daughter would require the following people to die. Elizabeth, Charles, William, Harry, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward.
      For Anne to inherit it would be Elizabeth, Charles, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Louise.

      A Prince/Princess is of royal descent, A Duke, Earl, Marquess, Viscount etc are Peers. (i.e. someone of sufficient quality/money/power to be worthy for a Royal to associate with)

      Edit: Dukes are of Royal blood, Earls and below can be elevated from the masses
      By Jove, he's got it! :) Well done, closet monarchist
      Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
        Notice Edward and Andrew's children are princesses but Anne's children are not.
        I am a little fuzzy as to why Anne's children are not princesses. Does this mean that if some accident occured and wiped out everyone up to Anne - that her children would not inherit the throne? Why does the royal family not handle the government - Is the Tony Blair seat commanded by the royal family? Or the other way around? What is the purpose of having a King if the King does not rule? I am not positive on how Queen Elizabeth got to be Queen, so this may answer my next question.....If Charles were to be King and then passed on, would Camilla remain in the Queen's seat (or would she never be in the Queen's seat?) or would the thronedom go to Prince William at that point?

        I think I find this all rather interesting.:)
        "To dream of the person you would like to be is to waste the person you are."-Sholem Asch

        "I always turn to the sports page first, which records people's accomplishments. The front page has nothing but man's failures."-Earl Warren

        "I didn't intend for this to take on a political tone. I'm just here for the drugs."-Nancy Reagan, when asked a political question at a "Just Say No" rally

        "He no play-a da game, he no make-a da rules."-Earl Butz, on the Pope's attitude toward birth control

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by THL View Post
          I am a little fuzzy as to why Anne's children are not princesses. Does this mean that if some accident occured and wiped out everyone up to Anne - that her children would not inherit the throne? Why does the royal family not handle the government - Is the Tony Blair seat commanded by the royal family? Or the other way around? What is the purpose of having a King if the King does not rule? I am not positive on how Queen Elizabeth got to be Queen, so this may answer my next question.....If Charles were to be King and then passed on, would Camilla remain in the Queen's seat (or would she never be in the Queen's seat?) or would the thronedom go to Prince William at that point?

          I think I find this all rather interesting.:)
          The principle in royal succession is 'primogeniture'. Everything goes to the first born. Should anything happen to him it goes to his sons. If they are too young the eldest uncle will act in his stead until he is old enough. In Britain the monarch has no direct power, and they are supposed to be above party politics in a constitutional monarchy. ( Although Charles has been meddling and he is thankfully not the monarch.) What QE2 does is advise the Prime Minister when so requested. As she has been on the throne since 1953 she is uniquely well informed about national and international affairs. There is no substitute for experience like that. :)
          Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

          Comment


          • #6
            Annes kids are not Princesses because she chose for them not to be

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by dave lukins View Post
              Annes kids are not Princesses because she chose for them not to be
              indeed, she chose that they had no titles at all, they are still heirs in succession (though of course they can renounce their claims should they wish).

              they could be normal people, i don't think the son - can't even remember his name - hasn't been seen in public for years, they aren't part of the royal scene at all.
              before criticizing someone, walk a mile in their shoes.................... then when you do criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by dave angel View Post
                indeed, she chose that they had no titles at all, they are still heirs in succession (though of course they can renounce their claims should they wish).

                they could be normal people, i don't think the son - can't even remember his name - hasn't been seen in public for years, they aren't part of the royal scene at all.
                Peter Mark Andrew Phillips...just to re-fresh your failing memory Dave

                Comment


                • #9
                  Didn't Prince Charles lose an uncle to an IRA attack?? What was his name?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Kansas Bear View Post
                    Didn't Prince Charles lose an uncle to an IRA attack?? What was his name?
                    Admiral of the Fleet Louis Francis Albert Victor Nicholas George Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma
                    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                    Leibniz

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                      Admiral of the Fleet Louis Francis Albert Victor Nicholas George Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma
                      You forgot the "KG, GCB, OM, GCSI, GCIE, GCVO, DSO, PC" part.
                      "Of all the manifestations of power, restraint impresses men the most." - Thucydides

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        So if Charles died before Elizabeth, the throne would pass to William upon Elizabeth's death?
                        "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                          So if Charles died before Elizabeth, the throne would pass to William upon Elizabeth's death?
                          yup.

                          if Charles, William and Harry (assuming that William and Harry had no kids) all pre-deceaced Elizabeth then it would fall to Andrew, Duke of York, go through his brood, then to Edward, Earl of Wessex, his brood, and then finally to Anne, Princess Royal and her brood.

                          see, dead simple.
                          before criticizing someone, walk a mile in their shoes.................... then when you do criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            * Reads discussion *



                            Sometimes I'm glad we have a Republic , how do you remember all this stuff?
                            Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
                            - John Stuart Mill.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by crooks View Post
                              * Reads discussion *



                              Sometimes I'm glad we have a Republic , how do you remember all this stuff?
                              f*ck knows...

                              i suppose the one advantage of this sytstem is that it can be self-pruning, if you find there's a loon/idiot in anything remotely approaching the line of succession you can arrange for something to 'happen' to them, you know, alcoholism leading to tragic liver-failure, a decent - but bloody - war, traffic accidents in Paris tunnels, allegations of Kiddie-Fiddling leading to 'unexplained' premature deaths....

                              it gives you time to train, time to select, time to prune.
                              before criticizing someone, walk a mile in their shoes.................... then when you do criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X