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

[macedonsky]

Is there any take which could reasonably explain their thought process, or is it pure double standards?

It was very interesting to read all 359 messages during one evening. What is "direct line"?

My modest attempt to define all 47 princes and princesses of Belgium can be found here (Google translate can be used for Russian text):
https://euro-royals.livejournal.com/924286.html
https://euro-royals.livejournal.com/935948.html
https://euro-royals.livejournal.com/955941.html
https://euro-royals.livejournal.com/964124.html
https://euro-royals.livejournal.com/996678.html

Recent news about recognising lawful titles of Their Royal Highnesses Delphine Saxe-Cobourg, Princess of Belgium, Josephine Saxe-Cobourg, Princess of Belgium and Oscar Saxe-Coburg, Princess of Belgium is very interesting in part of their future surnames.

What about interpretation of Article 4 I suppose "the Princes and Princesses, born in direct descendance" means just "issue". Children of Son Altesse Royal Princesse Marie-Esméralda, Adelaide, Lilian, Anne, Léopoldine, Princesse de Belgique, are born in direct descendance from His Majesty Leopold, George, Christian, Frederick of Saxe-Coburg, and are not covered by Articles 1 to 3. But they are not princess and prince.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I was hoping that in the future I could provide the above sequence of posts as a reference for people who had questions about Belgian royal titles and surnames, but some of the links to sources are broken because they are not https. The forum platform apparently autocorrects http:// to "http://iwasnotssl-", which breaks the link. Additionally, the links back to previous posts in the sequence seem to have broken when the threads were merged.

Unfortunately, posts cannot be edited after a specified period has passed. I'm afraid it seems the only option I can try is to repost Posts 1-6 with the links fixed.

For now, here is the fixed link to the Civil Code:

Dutch: LOI - WET
French: LOI - WET

 

[AristoCat]

A second question regarding Delphine Boël (I would still greatly appreciate any answers to my first question here: https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...elgian-royal-family-38975-18.html#post2342320). Assuming that she will be legally recognized as Albert's child and exercise her choice to adopt his surname, will she have the legal option to also change the surnames of her children? Article 335, § 4, of the Civil Code does not appear to make that clear.

What would posses her to do that? She would do that to her husband, suggesting that her husband's surname isn't good enough?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It occurs to me that Joséphine and Oscar O'Hare are/will be (has the ruling entered into effect?) not only Princess/Prince of Belgium, but also Duchess/Duke of Saxony and Princess/Prince of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.


It was decided by the 2015 Royal Decree that all Princes/Princesses of the blood among the descendants of King Leopold I should carry subsidiary titles inherited through their ancestry. For example, Article 2 reads, translated from French and Dutch:

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 forename, and, so far as they carry them, their family name and their dynastic title and ahead of the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. Their forename is preceded by the predicate His or Her Royal Highness.​

Note that carrying a family name is allowed but not obligatory, whereas carrying ancestral "other titles" is obligatory.


The Palace confirmed to Le Carnet Mondain in 2017 that King Albert, his half-sisters, and his male-line descendants fulfilled this obligation by carrying the "other titles" of Duchess/Duke of Saxony, Prince/Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, while Prince Lorenz's male-line descendants fulfilled the obligation by carrying the "other titles" of Archduchess/Archduke of Austria-Este.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...elgian-royal-family-38975-17.html#post2186636


But unlike the children of Prince Lorenz, the children of James O'Hare have no "other titles" which they can inherit from their father. The only conclusion is that when they become Princess and Prince, they must fulfill their obligation to carry "other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right" by carrying their mother's "other titles", Duchess of Saxony and Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

This is the first time in the history of the Belgian royal family that the Saxon titles have passed through a maternal line.

What would posses her to do that? She would do that to her husband, suggesting that her husband's surname isn't good enough?

If it were possible, I assume her husband's agreement would have been needed.

 

[macedonsky]

Note that carrying a family name is allowed but not obligatory, whereas carrying ancestral "other titles" is obligatory.

Are you seriously? But why?

This is the first time in the history of the Belgian royal family that the Saxon titles have passed through a maternal line.

I'm sorry but it's not Belgian matter. Bulgarians or Gloucesters can say "no".

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I understood:
All children and grandchildren of King Albert II are prince (princesse) de Belgique
All children of King Albert II have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of King Philippe have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of Prince Laurent have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of Princess Delphine have the maternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg*
The children of Princess Astrid also have the title archiduc (archiduchesse) d'Autriche-Este
All children of Princess Astrid have the paternal surname de Habsbourg-Este

* the children of Princess Delphine are not born in a legal marriage. Then it is up to the parents to decide on the surname. Apparently Priccess Delphine has chosen that they have their mother's new surname: de Saxe-Cobourg

Albert de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique - ancien Roi des Belges
Philippe de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique - Roi des Belges
Astrid de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Laurent de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique

 

[macedonsky]

I understood:
All children and grandchildren of King Albert II are prince (princesse) de Belgique

Yes, decree 1991 and 2015

All children of King Albert II have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of King Philippe have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of Prince Laurent have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of Princess Delphine have the maternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg*

No, the surname is not defined by law but by parents' choise. There is no "paternal surname".

the children of Princess Delphine are not born in a legal marriage. Then it is up to the parents to decide on the surname.

It is parent's decision in any way.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I understood:
All children and grandchildren of King Albert II are prince (princesse) de Belgique
All children of King Albert II have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of King Philippe have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of Prince Laurent have the paternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg
All children of Princess Delphine have the maternal surname de Saxe-Cobourg*
The children of Princess Astrid also have the title archiduc (archiduchesse) d'Autriche-Este
All children of Princess Astrid have the paternal surname de Habsbourg-Este

* the children of Princess Delphine are not born in a legal marriage. Then it is up to the parents to decide on the surname. Apparently Priccess Delphine has chosen that they have their mother's new surname: de Saxe-Cobourg

Albert de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique - ancien Roi des Belges
Philippe de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique - Roi des Belges
Astrid de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Laurent de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique

That is close, but not exactly.

The younger children of Prince Philippe and the children of Prince Laurent are

HRH Princess Louise, Princess of Belgium, Duchess of Saxony, Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha​

The children of Princess Astrid are

HRH Prince Amedeo, Prince of Belgium, Archduke of Austria-Este (Habsburg-Lorraine)​

The children of Princess Delphine are

HRH Princess Joséphine O'Hare, Princess of Belgium, Duchess of Saxony, Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha​

In each case, the part I have written in boldface is considered to be the legal surname.

The sources for what I have written above (other than for Delphine's children) can be found in the various articles to which I've provided links in this thread. I am in the midst of writing a series of posts which I hope will summarize the information from these sources (see the previous page of this thread)

Are you seriously? But why?

I'm sorry but it's not Belgian matter. Bulgarians or Gloucesters can say "no".

Refer to the link (and translation) to the Royal Decree in my previous post. I cannot see what Bulgarians or Gloucesters would have to say about Belgian legislation, but in any case they haven't objected in the nearly five years since the decree was enacted.

No, the surname is not defined by law but by parents' choise. There is no "paternal surname".

"Paternal surname" simply means the surname of the father, whether the parents chose it or not.

As Belgian children were automatically assigned the surname of their father until 2014, Philippe, Astrid, Laurent, and Delphine had no choice in the surname of their children.

https://diplomatie.belgium.be/en/services/services_abroad/registry/giving_a_name/

 

[Somebody]

It occurs to me that Joséphine and Oscar O'Hare are/will be (has the ruling entered into effect?) not only Princess/Prince of Belgium, but also Duchess/Duke of Saxony and Princess/Prince of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.


It was decided by the 2015 Royal Decree that all Princes/Princesses of the blood among the descendants of King Leopold I should carry subsidiary titles inherited through their ancestry. For example, Article 2 reads, translated from French and Dutch:

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 forename, and, so far as they carry them, their family name and their dynastic title and ahead of the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. Their forename is preceded by the predicate His or Her Royal Highness.​

Note that carrying a family name is allowed but not obligatory, whereas carrying ancestral "other titles" is obligatory.


The Palace confirmed to Le Carnet Mondain in 2017 that King Albert, his half-sisters, and his male-line descendants fulfilled this obligation by carrying the "other titles" of Duchess/Duke of Saxony, Prince/Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, while Prince Lorenz's male-line descendants fulfilled the obligation by carrying the "other titles" of Archduchess/Archduke of Austria-Este.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...elgian-royal-family-38975-17.html#post2186636


But unlike the children of Prince Lorenz, the children of James O'Hare have no "other titles" which they can inherit from their father. The only conclusion is that when they become Princess and Prince, they must fulfill their obligation to carry "other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right" by carrying their mother's "other titles", Duchess of Saxony and Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

This is the first time in the history of the Belgian royal family that the Saxon titles have passed through a maternal line.

If it were possible, I assume her husband's agreement would have been needed.

That doesn't make sense to me. It specifically states to apply 'as far as they carry them' and Delphine's childeren do NOT carry those titles - so, unless there is a law that specifies that all princes and princesses of Belgium automatically also are Duke/Duchess of Saxony and Prince/Princesse of S-C-G, I don't see why this would apply.

2015 decree
[...] portent le titre de Prince ou de Princesse de Belgique à la suite de leur prénom et, pour autant qu'ils les portent, de leur nom de famille et de leur titre dynastique et avant les autres titres qui leur reviennent de droit par leur ascendance. [...]
Translation
[...] carry the title of Prince or of Princess of Belgium following their first name and, so far as they carry them, their family name and their dynastic title and ahead of the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. [...]

And the post you referred to didn't say anything about it being an obligation to have other titles. The court's reply was:

"The Royal Decree of 2015 confirmed that the members of the royal family bear the titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. This is the case"

So, if their ancestry does not give them right to certain titles (in the case of Delphine's children), they don't carry them.

 

[JR76]

Refer to the link (and translation) to the Royal Decree in my previous post. I cannot see what Bulgarians or Gloucesters would have to say about Belgian legislation, but in any case they haven't objected in the nearly five years since the decree was enacted.

I imagine that the poster that you're replying to think in the same veins as I do. While Delphine and her children will be Prince/ss of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha according to Belgian legislation they will never be members of the House of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha headed by Prince Andreas. The same Andreas who, together with the other two remaining Wettin dukes, in 2015 issued a statement where they refuse to recognise Alexander of Sachsen-Gessaphe as members of the House of Wettin.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Delphine's lawyer was clear: he said that the Court of Justice has stated his cliente has exact the same surname and titles as her siblings. There is no any difference between them, the lawyer stressed.

And Delphine has chosen to use her surname for her children:

Joséphine de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Oscar de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique

They can not be Prinz (Prinzessin) von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha, Herzog (Herzogin) von Sachsen because these titles are not hereditary in the female lineage and are not in use by the royal family.

As Delphine's lawyer said she is styled in exactly identical to Philippe, Astrid and Laurent, this means that her children can not have German titles because she herself - like her siblings and like her father-- has no German titles either.

It is a mess. But it is because her father list control over his well-tailored pantalon. The same situation with the Duke of Parma or the Duke of Aosta. Just keep your trousers up, messires...

 

[Tatiana Maria]

That doesn't make sense to me. It specifically states to apply 'as far as they carry them' and Delphine's childeren do NOT carry those titles - so, unless there is a law that specifies that all princes and princesses of Belgium automatically also are Duke/Duchess of Saxony and Prince/Princesse of S-C-G, I don't see why this would apply.

"As far as they carry them" applies to "their family name and their dynastic title". It does not apply to "the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right".


This point is made even clearer in the French version of Article 4, where "as far as they carry THEM" (LES) is changed to "as far as they carry IT" (LE) because the possibility of a dynastic title is not included in Article 4.

Art. 4. Les Princes et Princesses, issus de la descendance directe de Sa Majesté Léopold, Georges, Chrétien, Frédéric de Saxe-Cobourg qui ne sont pas visés par les articles 1er à 3, portent à la suite de leur prénom et, pour autant qu'ils le portent, de leur nom de famille, les titres qui leur reviennent de droit par leur ascendance.

(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 forename and, so far as they carry it, their family name, the titles to which their ancestry gives them the right.)​

So the royal decree makes clear that they are expected to carry "other titles by right of their ancestry". It is conceivable that there might be other ancestral titles they could carry instead of the Saxon titles, but I cannot think of those alternatives.

And the post you referred to didn't say anything about it being an obligation to have other titles. The court's reply was:

"The Royal Decree of 2015 confirmed that the members of the royal family bear the titles to which their ancestry gives them the right. This is the case"

[...]

I was referring to the decree itself and its implication that, unlike the family name, the carrying of "other titles" is obligatory.

I imagine that the poster that you're replying to think in the same veins as I do. While Delphine and her children will be Prince/ss of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha according to Belgian legislation they will never be members of the House of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha headed by Prince Andreas. The same Andreas who, together with the other two remaining Wettin dukes, in 2015 issued a statement where they refuse to recognise Alexander of Sachsen-Gessaphe as members of the House of Wettin.

True, and I'm aware of that, but Andreas's non-recognition does not have the power to prevent Belgian legislation (or even German legislation) from being implemented.

Delphine's lawyer was clear: he said that the Court of Justice has stated his cliente has exact the same surname and titles as her siblings. There is no any difference between them, the lawyer stressed.
[...]
As Delphine's lawyer said she is styled in exact the same way as Philippe, Astrid and Laurent, this means that her children can not have German titles because she herself - like her siblings and like her father-- has no German titles either.

According to the Palace, they (her half-siblings) do. Please see the sources in this post.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...elgian-royal-family-38975-17.html#post2186636

 

[JR76]

True, and I'm aware of that, but Andreas's non-recognition does not have the power to prevent Belgian legislation (or even German legislation) from being implemented.

I know that. I never said that Andreas has any jurisdiction over Belgian legislation. I said that Belgian legislation has no jurisdiction over the house laws of the House of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[....]

According to the Palace, they (her half-siblings) do. Please see the sources in this post.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...elgian-royal-family-38975-17.html#post2186636

Is there anything functional in Belgium or in the Belgian royal household organization? The messires Yves-Henri Leleu and Marc Uyttendaele, lawyers of Delphine, were right in the door opening and summed up: titrée princesse de Belgique, nom de Saxe-Cobourg. "Identical to her siblings". Nothing has been said about any other titles.

It is waiting for the publication by the Hof van Beroep. The website of the Hof van Beroep is a hopeless amateuristic mess and my virus scanner went on tilt to warn me for an infected page. The publications of the Hof van Beroep are still stuck in 2019...

In my country everything is immediately online after Lady Justitia has spoken. Welcome in 2020 Belgium. Are you still working with MS DOS and Windows 3.1 or something ?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I know that. I never said that Andreas has any jurisdiction over Belgian legislation. I said that Belgian legislation has no jurisdiction over the house laws of the House of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha.

I know you didn't say that. But you stated that "I imagine that the poster that you're replying to think in the same veins as I do", and the poster to whom I was replying had stated that "I'm sorry but it's not Belgian matter", which seemingly extends further than your own thoughts, and that is the statement on which I was commenting.

Is there anything functional in Belgium or in the Belgian royal household organization? The messires Yves-Henri Leleu and Marc Uyttendaele, lawyers of Delphine, were right in the door opening and summed up: titrée princesse de Belgique, mom de Saxe-Cobourg. "Identical to her siblings". Nothing has been said about any other titles.

Well, it is not the first question on which her lawyers are in disagreement with the Belgian royal household ...

 

[Somebody]

"As far as they carry them" applies to "their family name and their dynastic title". It does not apply to "the other titles to which their ancestry gives them the right".

This point is made even clearer in the French version of Article 4, where "as far as they carry THEM" (LES) is changed to "as far as they carry IT" (LE) because the possibility of a dynastic title is not included in Article 4.

Art. 4. Les Princes et Princesses, issus de la descendance directe de Sa Majesté Léopold, Georges, Chrétien, Frédéric de Saxe-Cobourg qui ne sont pas visés par les articles 1er à 3, portent à la suite de leur prénom et, pour autant qu'ils le portent, de leur nom de famille, les titres qui leur reviennent de droit par leur ascendance.

(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 forename and, so far as they carry it, their family name, the titles to which their ancestry gives them the right.)​

So the royal decree makes clear that they are expected to carry "other titles by right of their ancestry". It is conceivable that there might be other ancestral titles they could carry instead of the Saxon titles, but I cannot think of those alternatives.

I see where you are coming from but I don't see how a provision about titles that they are expected to carry results in them being 'awarded' titles that their ancestry does NOT give them any rights to - that would be in opposition to exactly this same article as well.

I was referring to the decree itself and its implication that, unlike the family name, the carrying of "other titles" is obligatory.

I don't think I agree that an expectation that they will have other titles (as has been the case so far), makes it obligatory for them to claim titles they do not have any rights to.

 

[macedonsky]

The children of Princess Delphine are

HRH Princess Joséphine O'Hare, Princess of Belgium, Duchess of Saxony, Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha​

Please try to understand.

The title "Duchess of Saxony, Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" is not belgian. It is historical German title. King of Belgians can not rule this title. It is not surname. This old title can not transfer thru female line. This rule can not be broken due international context.

Son Altesse Royal Joséphine O'Hare, Princess de Belgique is not Herzogin von Sachsen, Prinzessin von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I see where you are coming from but I don't see how a provision about titles that they are expected to carry results in them being 'awarded' titles that their ancestry does NOT give them any rights to - that would be in opposition to exactly this same article as well.

I don't think I agree that an expectation that they will have other titles (as has been the case so far), makes it obligatory for them to claim titles they do not have any rights to.

Thank you, I see where you are coming from as well (and I don't necessarily disagree). But for clarification, is your statement that the O'Hare children's ancestry does not give them any rights to the Saxon titles based on their Saxon ancestry being through their maternal line, or being through an illegitimate line?

In the first case, what are your thoughts on why King Philippe and the Government in 2015 would have expected all future Princes/Princesses of the blood to have the right by virtue of their (patrilineal) ancestry to carry "other titles"? They would surely expect at least Princess Elisabeth's children to be Princes/Princesses. Wouldn't it be highly likely that Elisabeth would marry an untitled man and thus her children, Princes and Princesses, would have no patrilineal right to ancestral titles?

Please try to understand.

The title "Duchess of Saxony, Princess of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" is not belgian. It is historical German title. King of Belgians can not rule this title. It is not surname. This old title can not transfer thru female line. This rule can not be broken due international context.

Son Altesse Royal Joséphine O'Hare, Princess de Belgique is not Herzogin von Sachsen, Prinzessin von Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha.

Could you cite the international law on which you base your understanding? The FAQ of the Belgian federal government seems to state that the titles of Belgian citizens are ruled by Belgian law.

https://diplomatie.belgium.be/en/services/Protocol/nobility_and_honorary_distinctions/nobility/faq

It is worth noting that even under the current German rules, the titles are legally acknowledged as surnames and can transfer through female and illegitimate lines.

ETA: And if international law did not allow old rules of title inheritance to be overruled, then the title Prince/Princess of Belgium also could not be transferred through a female or illegitimate line.

 

[macedonsky]

Could you cite the international law on which you base your understanding? The FAQ of the Belgian federal government seems to state that the titles of Belgian citizens are ruled by Belgian law.

It is very simple. The King can no grant the title Prince of New York. It's politics. The King can not create Princess of Moscow. It's politics. So the King can not violate rules of foreign non-ruling house.

The titles of Saxe-Coburg is not belgian prerogative. Whenether says belgian law literally.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It is very simple. The King can no grant the title Prince of New York. It's politics. The King can not create Princess of Moscow. It's politics. So the King can not violate rules of foreign non-ruling house.

The titles of Saxe-Coburg is not belgian prerogative. Whenether says belgian law literally.

I hope I have understood you correctly. If I have, your argument is not that there is an international law forbidding countries from changing old rules of inheritance, but that the King will take into account whether his decisions might be politically undiplomatic in the eyes of foreign governments or foreign non-ruling families.

But in the case of Delphine and her children it is public knowledge that the decision was handed down by the Brussels court of appeal, not by the King. And given that the court either ignored or overruled the wishes of the ruling Belgian king and laws, I doubt they took into account the possible negative reactions of foreign non-ruling houses.

 

[macedonsky]

I hope I have understood you correctly. If I have, your argument is not that there is an international law forbidding countries from changing old rules of inheritance, but that the King will take into account whether his decisions might be politically undiplomatic in the eyes of foreign governments or foreign non-ruling families.

Yes, sorry again and again as last 23 years for my bad English. Yes, the King will take into account that he can not decide what to do with the titles of Dalai-Lama or Prince of SCG. Yes, thank you for understanding.

But in the case of Delphine and her children it is public knowledge that the decision was handed down by the Brussels court of appeal, not by the King. And given that the court either ignored or overruled the wishes of the ruling Belgian king and laws, I doubt they took into account the possible negative reactions of foreign non-ruling houses.

I think (as professional lawyer, Russian, sorry again and again) that the court of appeal just read decree-1891 literally without any possible details.

It is possible to recall the famous case of Ernst August and Electres Sophia Naturlisation Act 1956 or 1957 and famous Farran exemption. But it seems this case is simpliest, prince/ss are just issue, in 1891 language.

 

[Somebody]

Thank you, I see where you are coming from as well (and I don't necessarily disagree). But for clarification, is your statement that the O'Hare children's ancestry does not give them any rights to the Saxon titles based on their Saxon ancestry being through their maternal line, or being through an illegitimate line?

In the first case, what are your thoughts on why King Philippe and the Government in 2015 would have expected all future Princes/Princesses of the blood to have the right by virtue of their (patrilineal) ancestry to carry "other titles"? They would surely expect at least Princess Elisabeth's children to be Princes/Princesses. Wouldn't it be highly likely that Elisabeth would marry an untitled man and thus her children, Princes and Princesses, would have no patrilineal right to ancestral titles?

I was purely thinking about them being from a maternal line, them being illegitimate would be a second reason why their ancestry doesn't give them any rights to the title.

If these titles are suddenly also passed on in maternal line when they are 'princes and princesses of Belgium', Astrid's children should have added these titles to their list of titles as well which they didn't.

Regarding the wording of the article: it seems the Belgium royal family isn't really good at thinking ahead, so my guess is that they didn't think to specify that the 'other titles' are also on a 'if applicable' basis. They did realize that in practice not everyone used a surname, so they made explicit mention of that but somehow didn't do the same for the 'other titles' as until that moment it wasn't an issue. I cannot see how it was meant to 'create' titles for people that would normally not be entitled to them (other than the prince(ss) of Belgium title of course).

I'm not sure what your point is about Elizabeth's children? Clearly, they will be princes and princesses as children of the 'heir'; more specifically, they will be princes and princesses of Belgium; if they would have any other titles, they will also be added but only AFTER the prince(ss) of Belgium title - as that is the main message of this article. I don't know whether they have put much thought in whether they somehow want to make sure that Elizabeth as heir can pass on the other ancestral titles (I think they would need a special provision for that to happen - as long as they are princes and princesses of Belgium I don't see a pressing need) but I don't expect Eleonore's children to carry them (but with the Belgians you never know ).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I was purely thinking about them being from a maternal line, them being illegitimate would be a second reason why their ancestry doesn't give them any rights to the title.

Thank you for the clarification.

If these titles are suddenly also passed on in maternal line when they are 'princes and princesses of Belgium', Astrid's children should have added these titles to their list of titles as well which they didn't.

Just as a clarification, that is not the meaning I read in the royal decree. I only read the decree as imposing an obligation on all Princes and Princesses of the blood royal (whether or not they are Princes and Princesses of Belgium!) to carry "(other) titles to which their ancestry gives them the right", without specifying what those titles ought to be.

(Part of the basis for my reading is the statement in the decree about eliminating confusion between the title and the surname and the Palace's own clarification of that paragraph, but I will save that explanation for a later post.)

Accordingly, there was no reason for Prince Amedeo and his siblings to add the Saxe-Coburg titles to their list of titles, as they already met the obligation by carrying the "other titles" of their Habsburg father.

Regarding the wording of the article: it seems the Belgium royal family isn't really good at thinking ahead, so my guess is that they didn't think to specify that the 'other titles' are also on a 'if applicable' basis. They did realize that in practice not everyone used a surname, so they made explicit mention of that but somehow didn't do the same for the 'other titles' as until that moment it wasn't an issue. I cannot see how it was meant to 'create' titles for people that would normally not be entitled to them (other than the prince(ss) of Belgium title of course).

I'm not sure what your point is about Elizabeth's children? [...]

Your theory, as I understand it (please correct me if I am wrong), is that in 2015 King Philippe and the Government simply did not think of the possibility that some future Princes/Princesses might not have the right to any other titles on the basis of their patrilineal ancestry.

My point was: Wouldn't the possibility have occurred to them because Elisabeth is female, she may marry an untitled man, and her children are expected to be Princes and Princesses?

I do believe your theory may be correct, but we may have different opinions of how likely it is.

 

[Somebody]

Thank you for the clarification.

Just as a clarification, that is not the meaning I read in the royal decree. I only read the decree as imposing an obligation on all Princes and Princesses of the blood royal (whether or not they are Princes and Princesses of Belgium!) to carry "(other) titles to which their ancestry gives them the right", without specifying what those titles ought to be.

(Part of the basis for my reading is the statement in the decree about eliminating confusion between the title and the surname and the Palace's own clarification of that paragraph, but I will save that explanation for a later post.)

I read the decree as specifying who is entitled to the title 'prince/princesss of Belgium' and how it should be used (for example: always in combination with HRH; and dynastic titles are presented before the title prince(ss) of Belgium why other titles come after it. I do not interpret as an obligation to carry another title; and even less so as a right to a title they would otherwise not have a right to.

Accordingly, there was no reason for Prince Amedeo and his siblings to add the Saxe-Coburg titles to their list of titles, as they already met the obligation by carrying the "other titles" of their Habsburg father.

I am still curious to learn what communication of the court makes you read it as an obligation that needs to be fulfilled because I did not read it in your previous posts that you used to support this statement. But I'm sure you will provide a more lengthy explanation for us to understand your reasoning

Your theory, as I understand it (please correct me if I am wrong), is that in 2015 King Philippe and the Government simply did not think of the possibility that some future Princes/Princesses might not have the right to any other titles on the basis of their patrilineal ancestry.

My point was: Wouldn't the possibility have occurred to them because Elisabeth is female, she may marry an untitled man, and her children are expected to be Princes and Princesses?

I do believe your theory may be correct, but we may have different opinions of how likely it is.

Not completely. My theory is that it was never intended as an obligation, the focus was on the positioning of the title 'prince(ss)' of Belgium - and they presented it as it currently was and mentioned that the order would be
1) His/Her Royal Highness
2) First name
3) Last name (if applicable)
4) Dynastic title (if applicable - Duchess of Brabant for example)
5) Prince(ss) of Belgium
6) followed by any other titles their ancestry gives them right to (and if it doesn't, it just ends after 5).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Not completely. My theory is that it was never intended as n obligation, the focus was on the positioning of the title 'prince(ss)' of Belgium - and they presented it as it currently was and mentioned that the order would be
1) His/Her Royal Highness
2) First name
3) Last name (if applicable)
4) Dynastic title (if applicable - Duchess of Brabant for example)
5) Prince(ss) of Belgium
6) followed by any other titles their ancestry gives them right to (and if it doesn't, it just ends after 5).

Thanks again for the additional clarification.

There is one question I still have: What is your explanation of why an "if applicable" clause was mentioned for the family name and dynastic title, but not for "the (other) titles their ancestry gives them right to"? Since the decree does not state "any other titles", but rather "the other titles", I would have expected an "if applicable" for this, too, if the decree meant what you describe.

I am still curious to learn what communication of the court makes you read it as an obligation that needs to be fulfilled because I did not read it in your previous posts that you used to support this statement. But I'm sure you will provide a more lengthy explanation for us to understand your reasoning

Out of curiosity, have you read all of the articles which were linked in my previous posts? I meant to refer not to only what I had written but to what was written in the attached sources in support of my statement.

Even with the sources, I realize it is not simple to understand (as it took me quite a while myself), thus the lengthy explanation. You can read the first six parts of it beginning with this post: https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...elgian-royal-family-38975-18.html#post2321611 And yes, I intend to complete it at some point.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It remains a case for headbanging that the Arrest of the Hof van Beroep / the Arrêt of the Cour d'Appel is nowhere to find.

Headbanging because jurisprudence by courts of justice should be public. Undoubtly the argument will be: it will be published in the Rolls, you can make an appointment at the Griffier / Greffier (Registrar) and see the verdict in the archives of the Palais de Justice. But hey... This is 2020...

Without the Arrest/Arrêt plus explanatory memorandum it remains speculation about the exact wording of the titulature.

This is an example of publication: http://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2009:BJ6330

Another example:
https://swarb.co.uk/associated-newspapers-ltd-v-prince-of-wales-ca-21-dec-2006/

 

[Kataryn]

I imagine that the poster that you're replying to think in the same veins as I do. While Delphine and her children will be Prince/ss of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha according to Belgian legislation they will never be members of the House of Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha headed by Prince Andreas. The same Andreas who, together with the other two remaining Wettin dukes, in 2015 issued a statement where they refuse to recognise Alexander of Sachsen-Gessaphe as members of the House of Wettin.

And they don't recognize the daughters of Iris of Saxony, Duchess and Princess of Saxony as members of the House of Wettin, as Iris was born from a non-dynastical marriage and her daughters were born out of wedlock. So why should they accept the daughter of Albert II born out of wedlock as member of their House? Alexander of Saxony-Gessaphe is at least the son from a Saxon princess born in wedlock.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

And they don't recognize the daughters of Iris of Saxony, Duchess and Princess of Saxony as members of the House of Wettin, as Iris was born from a non-dynastical marriage and her daughters were born out of wedlock. So why should they accept the daughter of Albert II born out of wedlock as member of their House? Alexander of Saxony-Gessaphe is at least the son from a Saxon princess born in wedlock.

By my understanding just the Belgian (!) surname de Saxe-Cobourg is used in the case of the children of Delphine. Her lawyers made no any mention of German titles. Also not in the case of her siblings.

Albert de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique

Philippe de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Elisabeth de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Gabriel de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Eléonore de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Emmanuel de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique

Astrid de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Amedeo d'Autriche-Este, prince de Belgique
Anna Astrid d'Autriche-Este, princesse de Belgique
Maximilian d'Autriche-Este, prince de Belgique
Maria Laura d'Autriche-Este, princesse de Belgique
Joachim d'Autriche-Este, prince de Belgique
Luisa Maria d'Autriche-Este, princesse de Belgique
Laetitia Maria d'Autriche-Este, prince de Belgique

Laurent de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Louise de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Nicolas de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Aymeric de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique

Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Joséphine de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Oscar de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique

 

[Mbruno]

By my understanding just the Belgian (!) surname de Saxe-Cobourg is used in the case of the children of Delphine. Her lawyers made no any mention of German titles. Also not in the case of her siblings.

Albert de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique

Philippe de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Elisabeth de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Gabriel de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Eléonore de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Emmanuel de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique

Astrid de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Amedeo d'Autriche-Este, prince de Belgique
Anna Astrid d'Autriche-Este, princesse de Belgique
Maximilian d'Autriche-Este, prince de Belgique
Maria Laura d'Autriche-Este, princesse de Belgique
Joachim d'Autriche-Este, prince de Belgique
Luisa Maria d'Autriche-Este, princesse de Belgique
Laetitia Maria d'Autriche-Este, prince de Belgique

Laurent de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Louise de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Nicolas de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique
Aymeric de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique

Delphine de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Joséphine de Saxe-Cobourg, princesse de Belgique
Oscar de Saxe-Cobourg, prince de Belgique

I have never seen any document or public event in which the last name Saxe-Cobourg was used by any of the legitimate descendants of King Albert II, including King Philippe's children.


As we have seen recently, Princess Élisabeth is known as "van België" in the Royal Military Academy, even though "van België" is not a family name.

 

[maria-olivia]

It is the name written on their ID card.