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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree, if this change was made in order to reduce the princes/princesses in the family, well this creates an even bigger mess.

If you think about it, it is similar to the old French tradition where the children and grandchildren of the King or the Dauphin (in certain cases) were enfants de France or petits-enfants de France, whereas other dynasts (male line descendants of Hugh Capet) were simply "princes of the blood" ( princes du sang).

So, now there are "princes/princesses of Belgium" , who are recognized as the official members of the royal family and as HRHs, and other princes or princesses of the blood, who are direct descendants of Léopold I (previously only in male line, but now also in maternal line),

A different question is whether an ordinary Mr Luc Vanderdorpe who nonetheless has "royal blood", will be registered in his birth certificate as "Prince Luc Vanderdorpe" or not, I guess we won't know that until the daughters of Princess Astrid or Princess Louise have children of their own.
 
Last edited:
The most logic thing is that the children of Amedeo, Maria Laura, Joachim, Luisa Maria and Laetitia Maria follow the rules for the Belgian nobility.

That means that the children of Amedeo and Joachim are (will be) Archdukes and -duchesses of Austria-Este.

The children of Maria Laura, Luisa Maria and Laetitia Maria will have their father's eventual titles. Imagine that Maria Laura marries a graaf d'Udekem d'Acoz. They get a son, Albert. When they follow the assumed "prinses Anna-Astrid" example, is then his title prins Albert graaf d'Udekem d'Acoz? That is really a clash of titles and styles.
 
Last edited:
Sure they are decreasing the number of Princes/Princesses of Belgium, but giving children from a collateral branch the same title as the main branch is rather messy, I think you all can agree on that. If it is true that the family has started using the German family name again (and therefore the titles as well), than the collateral branches should use lower titles (ducal ones for instance), the way they do in The Netherlands, for example, while still being part of the extended royal family.
 
Last edited:
The most "logic" solution would be:

- the children of Princess Elisabeth: prins (prinses) van België and the eventual title and surname of their father *

- the children of Prince Gabriel: prins (prinses) van België, prins (prinses) van Saksen-Coburg en Gotha, hertog (hertogin) van Saksen

- the children of Prince Emmanuel: prins (prinses) van België, prins (prinses) van Saksen-Coburg en Gotha, hertog (hertogin) van Saksen

- the children of Princess Leonore: prins (prinses) van België and the eventual title and surname of their father *
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- the children of Prince Amedeo: aartshertog (aartshertogin) van Oostenrijk-Este

- the children of Princess Maria Laura: the eventual title and the surname of their father

- the children of Princess Luisa Maria: the eventual title and the surname of their father

- the children of Prince Joachim: aartshertog (aartshertogin) van Oostenrijk-Este

- the children of Princess Letitia Maria: the eventual title and the surname of their father

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- the children of Princess Louise: the eventual title and the surname of their father

- the children of Prince Nicolas: prins (prinses) van Saksen-Coburg en Gotha, hertog (hertogin) van Saksen

- the children of Prince Aymeric: prins (prinses) van Saksen-Coburg en Gotha, hertog (hertogin) van Saksen

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* For an example: Princess Elizabeth or Princess Leonore marries a graaf de la Boëssière-Thiennes, their children can be prins (prinses) van België, graaf (gravin) de la Boëssière-Thiennes.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure that logic and titles in the Benelux monarchies go well together. Thanks to those posters who share their knowledge of the matter in this thread.

The most logical thing would indeed be to create a secondary title for members that do not belong to the main line, princes of Coburg or even the entire Saxe-Coburg & Gotha. But the family started using the surname "de Belgique/van Belgie", so perhaps it is not likely they will return to their German origines at any point in the future.

The vagueness around the titles in Belgium perhaps means that no clear decision has been taken yet, other than that they will not be princes of Belgium. As we saw at Queen Paola's 80th birthday: the main line and the rest do not seem to be on speaking terms.

Are Amedeo's (future) child(ren) legally speaking even nobles? The Austria-Este title was not incorporated into the Belgian nobility AFAIK. This only happened for Archdukes Rudolf and Carl-Christian in 1978. Of course this may be a sensitive matter in the family.

Duc_et_Pair said:
I find this an utmost confusing way. When Laetitia Maria marries an untitled gentleman, Mr Van Aert and they get a son, Luc, is then his title "prins Luc Van Aert" analogue to his cousine "prinses Anna-Astrid"?

Sounds like a prince Carnaval. Surely this option can not be the intention of the RF.
 
Last edited:
Sure they are decreasing the number of Princes/Princesses of Belgium, but giving children from a collateral branch the same title as the main branch it is rather messy, I think you all can agree on that. If it is true that the family has started using the German family name again (and therefore the titles as well), than the collateral branches should use lower titles (ducal ones for instance), the way they do in The Netherlands, for example and while still being part of the extended royal family.

They are not being given the same titles. Only people born as children or grandchildren of the King or of the heir to the throne will be "princes/princesses of Belgium". The designation of other dynasts (previously descendants in male line of King Léopold I) as princes/princesses is not new. As I said, it was already implicit in the royal decrees of 1891 and 1991 where the word "prince" without territorial designation should be read, as I see it, not in the British sense of a member of the royal family, but rather as meaning anyone who is "of royal blood".

The novelty in the 2015 decree compared to the previous one from 1991 is that:

  1. The descendants of Princess Astrid and Prince Laurent beyond their children will no longer be "princes/princesses of Belgium" and, Anna Astrid's birth certificate notwithstanding, they should not be HRHs either. In that sense, they have been "demoted".
  2. However, the descendants in both paternal and maternal line of King Albert II who are not princes/princesses of Belgium are still implicitly princes/princesses in the French sense of a prince du sang, adjusted now for cognatic succession.
  3. The royal family, as I understand it, includes only the King and Queen, the princes and princesses of Belgium, and the former King and his wife upon abdication when applicable, but otherwise excludes other princes/princesses who are not "of Belgium".
As I said, it remains to be seen if "princes of the blood" who are not members of the royal family will use the title Prince/Princess as part of their legal name or not. I agree it will be weird if they call themselves Prince/Princess [Given Name] [Family Name].
 
Last edited:
Exemple in Luxembourg, I saw on her Chair in a Church before She came.
SAR et I l' Archiduchesse Marie Christine de Habsbourg, Comtesse Rodolphe de Limbourg-Stirum. (Their Children are Limbourg Stirum)
This is the new way to avoid too much Princes of Belgium and Luxembourg who are not from the main Branch.
 
I am not sure that logic and titles in the Benelux monarchies go well together. Thanks to those posters who share their knowledge of the matter in this thread.

The most logical thing would indeed be to create a secondary title for members that do not belong to the main line, princes of Coburg or even the entire Saxe-Coburg & Gotha. But the family started using the surname "de Belgique/van Belgie", so perhaps it is not likely they will return to their German origines at any point in the future.

The vagueness around the titles in Belgium perhaps means that no clear decision has been taken yet, other than that they will not be princes of Belgium. As we saw at Queen Paola's 80th birthday: the main line and the rest do not seem to be on speaking terms.

Are Amedeo's (future) child(ren) legally speaking even nobles? The Austria-Este title was not incorporated into the Belgian nobility AFAIK. This only happened for Archdukes Rudolf and Carl-Christian in 1978. Of course this may be a sensitive matter in the family.



Sounds like a prince Carnaval. Surely this option can not be the intention of the RF.

I totally agree. I think this change has been done this way to distance the main line from the cadet lines but allowing them to retain a certain "aura" of royalty in the titles of their descendants (some people care about titles). Probably changes will be done in the future to clarify the situation, when both Astrid's and Laurent's offspring will be related distantly enough.
 
They are not being given the same titles. Only people born as children or grandchildren of the King or of the heir to the throne will be "princes/princesses of Belgium". The designation of other dynasts (previously descendants in male line of King Léopold I) as princes/princesses is not new. As I said, it was already implicit in the royal decrees of 1891 and 1991 where the word "prince" without territorial designation should be read, as I see it, not in the British sense of a member of the royal family, but rather as meaning anyone who is "of royal blood".

The novelty in the 2015 decree compared to the previous one from 1991 is that:

  1. The descendants of Princess Astrid and Prince Laurent beyond their children will no longer be "princes/princesses of Belgium" and, Anna Astrid's birth certificate notwithstanding, they should not be HRHs either. In that sense, they have been "demoted".
  2. However, the descendants in both paternal and maternal line of King Albert II who are not princes/princesses of Belgium are still implicitly princes/princesses in the French sense of a prince du sang, adjusted now for cognatic succession.
  3. The royal family, as I understand it, includes only the King and Queen, the princes and princesses of Belgium, and the former King and his wife upon abdication when applicable, but otherwise excludes other princes/princesses who are not "of Belgium".
As I said, it remains to be seen if "princes of the blood" who are not members of the royal family will use the title Prince/Princess as part of their legal name or not. I agree it will be weird if they call themselves Prince/Princess [Given Name] [Family Name].


Ok, this way it is clearer to me, but when I said "same title" I was referring to the princely title. I am aware of the distinction between "royal princes" and "princes of the blood" but, this way things can be extremely confusing and dangerous...we all know how press and medias can use false and confused infos to send bad messages to their audience. Plus, when it comes to the children from a female line who, traditionally, should carry exclusively their father's titles (unless being directly involved with the succession to the throne), it is rather nonsense to carry on with princely titles, as if P. Maria Laura marries a Mr. Smith and their daughter is a Princess Jane Smith and so forth since she would be a descendant of King Leopold.
 
They try to respect the standing situation, not to "rob" people from their titles but when they would limit the title prins (prinses) van België to children of a monarch and children of a heir, then the logic becomes visible:

The (grand)children of Léopold III
prinses Marie-Christine van België
prinses Marie-Esmeralda van België
Alexandra Moncada
Leopoldo Moncada

The children of Albert II

prins Philippe / Filip van België
prinses Astrid van België
prins Laurent van België

The children of Philippe / Filip
prinses Elisabeth van België
prins Gabriel van België
prins Emmanuel van België
prinses Leonore van België

The children of Astrid
Amedeo, aartshertog van Oostenrijk-Este
Anna-Astrid, aartshertogin van Oostenrijk-Este
Maria-Laura, aartshertogin van Oostenrijk-Este
Luisa-Maria, aartshertogin van Oostenrijk-Este
Joachim, aartshertog van Oostenrijk-Este
Laetitia-Maria, aartshertogin van Oostenrijk-Este

The children of Laurent
Louise, prinses van Saksen-Coburg en Gotha
Nicholas, prins van Saksen-Coburg en Gotha
Aymeric, prinses van Saksen-Coburg en Gotha
 
Last edited:
When they follow the assumed "prinses Anna-Astrid" example, is then his title prins Albert graaf d'Udekem d'Acoz? That is really a clash of titles and styles.


Princess Anna Astrid's title of Princess is not merely "assumed" - it is a fact.


- Le Soir quoted the exact words of her birth certificate: She was registered in the civil registry as Princess Anna Astrid Marie Archduchess of Austria-Este.

"A la rubrique « nom et prénoms », son acte de naissance porte en effet, comme nous avons pu le voir : « Son Altesse Impériale et Royale la Princesse Anna Astrid Marie Archiduchesse d'Autriche-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine) »."

"In the column 'surname and given names', her birth certificate uses, as a matter of fact, as we were able to see it: 'Her Imperial and Royal Highness Princess Anna Astrid Marie Archduchess of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)'."

http://plus.lesoir.be/53935/article...ur-les-princes-qui-ne-seront-plus-de-belgique


- Letters from the household of Princess Astrid (one in English is pictured in the photograph here) styled her granddaughter as Princess Anna Astrid.

"Their Royal Highnesses Princess Astrid, Prince Lorenz, Prince Amedeo and Princess Elisabetta thank you for the kind wishes you have sent on the occasion of the first birthday of our little sunshine Princess Anna Astrid.

Jan Matthysen
Ambassador (ret.)
Advisor to Princess Astrid"


- A palace spokesman confirmed that she would enjoy the title of princess.

"The royal family’s newest member will enjoy the title of princess – but, for dynastic reasons, she will not be a Princess of Belgium, the palace spokesman confirms to PEOPLE.

“It’s entirely possible that she may assume other titles in due course,” according to the spokesman, who confirms that the young family will live in Brussels."

Princess Anna Astrid: Brussels Prince Amedeo and Elisabetta Welcome Baby | PEOPLE.com


- The Palace communicated that she was "Princess Anna Astrid" to Le Carnet Mondain, the yearbook of noble and distinguished Belgian families.

"Par contre, la petite Anna Astrid n'a ni titre ni nom dans « Le carnet mondain », étant simplement renseigné comme « la princesse Anna Astrid » . Preuve de l'existence d'un royal problème ? Sachant, comme le précise le volumineux ouvrage mondain, que « les informations concernant la famille royale de belgique sont reproduites tellse qu'elles nous sont communiquées par le Palais »."

"In contrast, the small Anna Astrid has neither title nor surname in "Le carnet mondain", being filled out as "the princess Anna Astrid". Proof of the existence of a royal problem? Knowing the bulky work specifies that "information concerning the royal family of Belgium is reproduced from that which was communicated to us by the Palace"."

http://plus.lesoir.be/92478/article/2017-05-04/la-famille-royale-sappelle-nouveau-de-saxe-cobourg


- The Palace communicated the same information to Place Royale. (Place Royale uses the term "Officiel" to describe information given from the Palace.)

"OFFICIEL Le bébé du Prince et de la Princesse Amedeo de Belgique est la Princesse Anna Astrid @MonarchieBe"

"OFFICIAL The baby of Prince and Princess Amedeo of Belgium is Princess Anna Astrid @MonarchieBe

 
Last edited:
But it are all secondary sources. Even a municipal register can be wrongly filled (the average clerk will have no idea at all).

The primary source is a Royal Decree giving all descendants to Léopold I, even those not in direct lineage (like Anna-Astrid) the title of prins (prinses). Where is that Decree, signed by the King and contrasigned by the Government?

This because the (not foreseen?) consequence of all this is that the children of Maria-Laura, Luisa-Maria, Laetitia-Maria and Louise are all prins (prinses) as well, resulting in prins Marc Peeters, prinses Olivia Willems and prins Sem Goossens.
 
:previous:

But where is the primary source for your claim that the official birth certificate was filled out wrongly and not corrected already by three months (!) after, when it was published?

According to which sources are the birth certificate, the letters from Princess Astrid's household, and the plentiful statements from the Palace constantly wrong, allegedly?

The decree of November 12, 2015, which was indeed signed by the King and contrasigned by the Government, is here.
Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad
It does not say that all descendants of King Leopold I are princes and princesses, but it indeed means that at least a portion of them will be.

Moreover, I would not consider the birth certificate, the spokesmen for the Palace, or Princess Astrid's advisor to be secondary sources.
 
Last edited:
How difficult when all is easy for us Belgians to understand !
 
How difficult when all is easy for us Belgians to understand !

It is actually very confusing and difficult to understand, but maybe the Belgians have a superior intellect in this aspect.

:flowers:
 
:previous:

But where is the primary source for your claim that the official birth certificate was filled out wrongly and not corrected already by three months (!) after, when it was published?

According to which sources are the birth certificate, the letters from Princess Astrid's household, and the plentiful statements from the Palace constantly wrong, allegedly?

The decree of November 12, 2015, which was indeed signed by the King and contrasigned by the Government, is here.
Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad
It does not say that all descendants of King Leopold I are princes and princesses, but it indeed means that at least a portion of them will be.

Moreover, I would not consider the birth certificate, the spokesmen for the Palace, or Princess Astrid's advisor to be secondary sources.

The link you provided to the State Gazette speaks about Princes (Princesses) of Belgium.

Article 1
The Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, born in a direct descendance to the King,
as well as the Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, born in a direct descendance to the Crown Prince or Crown Princess, bear the title of Prince or Princess of Belgium

-> This does not apply to Anna-Astrid: she is no child or grandchild of the King or the Crown Princess


Article 2
The Princes and the Princesses, children and grandchildren, born in a direct descendance to His Majesty King Albert II, bear the title of Prince or Princess of Belgium

-> This does not apply on Anna-Astrid: she is no child or grandchild to King Albert II

Article 3
The Princes and Princesses, who already hold the title Prince or Princess of Belgium, keep this title.

-> This does not apply on Anna-Astrid: she was born after this Decree

Article 4
The Princes and Princesses, born in a direct descendance to Leopold I von Sachsen-Coburg, and who are not covered by Articles 1 to 3, carry after their first name and their family name, as far as they conduct these, the titles that belong to them according to their ascendance.

-> This does not apply on Anna-Astrid: she is no direct descendant to King Leopold I, she is the granddaughter of a Belgian Princess (one can argue that Amedeo is a "direct descendant" via his mother, but Anna-Astrid is a descendant of a Von Habsburg father and a Rosboch von Wolkenstein mother). She is an indirect descendant to Leopold I.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So. Where does the title "prinses Anna-Astrid" come from? Article 4? Is she regarded as "geboren uit de nakomelingschap in rechte lijn van / issus de la descendance directe" to Leopold I von Sachsen-Coburg?

She is not. She is no Sachsen-Coburg. She is a Habsburg. But let us assume she is regarded as a "direct descendant" then also Alexandra and Leopoldo Moncada are "direct descendants'. And when Maria-Laura von Habsburg marries a British gentleman, Mr Harry Smith, then their daughter is a "direct descendant" too? Prinses Laura Smith?

But let us assume that indeed Article 4 is applicable indeed. Then one can not say that it applies on individual A but not on individual B: the daughter of Amedeo von Habsburg is "prinses" and the daughter of Maria Laura Smith née Von Habsburg is no "prinses". Then one is discriminating within the same Article 4.

For so far the "logic" and "easy to understand" Belgian arrangement for the titulature.


:whistling:
 
Last edited:
:previous:



The decree of November 12, 2015, which was indeed signed by the King and contrasigned by the Government, is here.
Moniteur Belge - Belgisch Staatsblad
It does not say that all descendants of King Leopold I are princes and princesses, but it indeed means that at least a portion of them will be.
.

I guess that depends on how you interpret Art. 4 of the 2015 royal decree. Just to provide some context, let us examine first what the previous royal decrees said.

1) Royal Decree of 18/3/1891

"Art. 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui les concernent, les princes et les princesses issus de la descendance masculine et directe de feu Sa Majesté Léopold Ier, seront qualifiés de princes et princesses de Belgique, à la suite de leurs prénoms et avant la mention de leur titre originaire de duc ou duchesse de Saxe.
Les princesses unies par mariage aux princes de notre maison royale seront qualifiées de la même manière à la suite des noms et titres qui leur sont propres
"

2) Royal Decree of 2/12/1991

"Art. 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui les concernent, les Princes et les Princesses issus de la descendance, en ligne directe de S.A.R. le Prince Albert,(...), Prince de Liège (sic), Prince de Belgique, seront qualifiés Princes et Princesses de Belgique, à la suite de leurs prénoms.
Art. 2. L'arrêté Royal du 18/3/1891, qualifiant Princes et Princesses de Belgique les Princes et Princesses issus de la descendance de feu Sa Majesté Léopold Ier, est abrogé."


3) Royal Decree of 12/11/2015

"Article 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui les concernent, les Princes et les Princesses, enfants et petits-enfants, issus de la descendance directe du Roi ainsi que les Princes et les Princesses, enfants et petits-enfants, issus de la descendance directe du Prince héritier ou de la Princesse héritière 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. Leur prénom est précédé par le prédicat Son Altesse Royale.

Art. 2. Dans les actes publics et privés qui les concernent, les Princes et les Princesses, enfants et petits-enfants, issus de la descendance directe de Sa Majesté le Roi Albert II 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. Leur prénom est précédé par le prédicat Son Altesse Royale.

Art. 3. Les Princes et les Princesses qui portent le titre de Prince ou de Princesse de Belgique en vertu de l'arrêté royal du 14 mars 1891 qualifiant Princes et Princesses de Belgique les Princes et Princesses issus de la descendance masculine et directe de feu Sa Majesté Léopold Ier gardent ce titre à la suite de leur prénom et, pour autant qu'ils le portent, de leur nom de famille et avant les autres titres qui leur reviennent de droit par leur ascendance. Leur prénom est précédé par le prédicat Son Altesse Royale.

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."



It appears to me that the only reasonable interpretation for the the words "les princes et princesses, issus de la descendance [...]" in all those documents is to take "prince" and "princess" as synonyms of "dynasts", which would be consistent with both French and Germanic tradition. The separate title of "Prince/Princess of Belgium", which implies membership of the royal family and the style of HRH (cf. Arts 1-3 of the 2015 royal decree) applies, on the other hand, only to a more restricted class of persons.

It is also clear to me that "descendance en ligne directe" in those decrees is meant to be descendance both in paternal and maternal line. Otherwise, Art.1 of the 1991 royal decree would not apply to Princess Astrid's children and they would not be Princes/Princesses of Belgium. If the legislator had the intention to constrain the meaning of "descendance directe" to paternal line, then he would have written instead "descendance masculine et directe" as was done explicitly in the royal decree of 1891. The fact that "masculine" was explicitly dropped in the royal decrees of 1991 and 2015 seems intentional to me.
 
Last edited:
So. Where does the title "prinses Anna-Astrid" come from? Article 4? Is she regarded as "geboren uit de nakomelingschap in rechte lijn van / issus de la descendance directe" to Leopold I von Sachsen-Coburg?

She is not. She is no Sachsen-Coburg. She is a Habsburg. But let us assume she is regarded as a "direct descendant" then also Alexandra and Leopoldo Moncada are "direct descendants'. And when Maria-Laura von Habsburg marries a British gentleman, Mr Harry Smith, then their daughter is a "direct descendant" too? Prinses Laura Smith?

But let us assume that indeed Article 4 is applicable indeed. Then one can not say that it applies on individual A but not on individual B: the daughter of Amedeo von Habsburg is "prinses" and the daughter of Maria Laura Smith née Von Habsburg is no "prinses". Then one is discriminating within the same Article 4.

For so far the "logic" and "easy to understand" Belgian arrangement for the titulature.


:whistling:

You have expressed my doubts better than I could. That is exactly my point. I am afraid though that the entire concept of "direct descendant" can be twisted by the fact that they all are in the line of succession and this way anyone can claim to be a direct descendant of Leopold I.
 
Last edited:
You have expressed my doubts better than I could. That is exactly my point. I am afraid though that the entire concept of "direct descendant" can be twisted by the fact that they all are in the line of succession and this way anyone can claim to be a direct descendant of Leopold I.

The concept of "direct descendant" is not so hard to grasp. It means simply that someone is a child, grandchild, great-grandchild , great-great-grandchild, etc. of someone else, as opposed to a nephew/niece, or grandnephew/grandniece for example. The only lingering doubt is if "direct descendance" can also be claimed in maternal line, or if it applies in paternal line only. As I wrote before, I understand the wording in the royal decrees of 1991 and 2015 is meant to signify cognatic direct descendance, as opposed to male-line direct descendance.
 
Last edited:
Would it be an option for the King to reinstate abolished titles like Comte de Flandres in the future?
 
The concept of "direct descendant" is not so hard to grasp. It means simply that someone is a child, grandchild, great-grandchild , great-great-grandchild, etc. of someone else, as opposed to a nephew/niece, or grandnephew/grandniece for example. The only lingering doubt is if "direct descendance" can also be claimed in maternal line, or if it applies in paternal line only. As I wrote before, I understand the wording in the royal decrees of 1991 and 2015 is meant to signify cognatic direct descendance, as opposed to male-line direct descendance.

No, it isn't difficult to grasp that concept. What is hard for me to grasp instead is the practicality of having dozens and dozens of princes/princesses (yes, I got they will be rather different from those in the main line) in the future who won't be close to the throne. I like the way the british royal family deals with this business: the farther from the throne, the lesser your title...
 
Last edited:
The concept of "direct descendant" is not so hard to grasp. It means simply that someone is a child, grandchild, great-grandchild , great-great-grandchild, etc. of someone else, as opposed to a nephew/niece, or grandnephew/grandniece for example. [...]

[...]

It is also clear to me that "descendance en ligne directe" in those decrees is meant to be descendance both in paternal and maternal line. Otherwise, Art.1 of the 1991 royal decree would not apply to Princess Astrid's children and they would not be Princes/Princesses of Belgium. If the legislator had the intention to constrain the meaning of "descendance directe" to paternal line, then he would have written instead "descendance masculine et directe" as was done explicitly in the royal decree of 1891. The fact that "masculine" was explicitly dropped in the royal decrees of 1991 and 2015 seems intentional to me.

I find those to be very sound points. Indeed, if "direct descendants" (or "Princes and Princesses") meant the male-line direct descendants only, then Princess Astrid's children would not be Princes/ses of Belgium under the 1991 (or the 2015) royal decree.

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

Moreover, while there is lingering doubt if Article 4 of the 2015 decree is applicable to a princess's child, there is no doubt that it is applicable to a prince's child, given that it has been applied to Amedeo's daughter.

I wish to underline that thus far all the reliable sources - I have quoted them here, the birth certificate included - state that the child's primary title is Princess Anna Astrid. As yet, no reliable sources have disputed the birth certificate or the information provided by the Palace.
 
Last edited:
I do not contest the birth certificate but Belgium is not exactly known for it's accuratesse. The marriage of Anna-Astrid's own parents comes to mind. The Royal Court seemed taken by surprise by press questions if Prince Amedeo did request permission or not. Also the titulature of Elisabetta remained foggy. It was as if they were unprepared amateurs. When you simply look at the four articles it remains a mystery where that "princess first-name" thing comes from:

- article 1 covers the children and grandchildren of the King and the Duchess of Brabant: not applicable to Anna-Astrid
- article 2 covers the children and grandchildren of King Albert II: not applicable to Anna-Astrid
- article 3 covers the ones already holding the title Prince (Princess) of Belgium: not applicable to Anna-Astrid
- article 4 covers the descendants in direct lineage to Leopold I: not applicable to Astrid she is a granddaughter to a descendant of Leopold)

It almost looks like the title "prinses Anna-Astrid" is the result of a discutable interpretation of Article 4 (or more likely, seeing the vaudeville around the marriage) just sloppy amateurism of the Household.

In Dutch - about the fact that Amedeo retroactively requested permission, six months áfter his marriage, and that this was given, with Government and Parliament discutably keeping themselves dumb and dumber about the legal infringements to spare embarrassment to the palace:
http://m.knack.be/nieuws/belgie/ame...uiten-de-grondwet/article-opinion-665243.html
 
Last edited:
I second Duc_et_Pair. The Belgium court has clearly shown that they don't know what they are doing.

My understanding was that indeed in 1991 was decided to make all descendants princes and princess of Belgium. At that point they were a little worried about Laurent becoming the future king as his brother didn't show any desire to marry while Astrid had children that could secure the throne if necessary. Clearly, they didn't think it through as nobody would want an uncountable number of princes and princesses of Belgium in the next decades.

Therefore, in 2015, this was reversed by reserving the title of prince(ss) of Belgium to children and grandchildren of the king or heir. For the great-grandchildren of the king this means that they rely on the title and name that their lineage entitles them to, which is by their father and not including the prince(ss) of Belgium title, unless their mother would have a title or name with a special provision that it might be given to her descendants (which in Belgium seems to be the case for normal surnames but not for titles of nobility).
 
I do not contest the birth certificate but Belgium is not exactly known for it's accuratesse. The marriage of Anna-Astrid's own parents comes to mind. The Royal Court seemed taken by surprise by press questions if Prince Amedeo did request permission or not. Also the titulature of Elisabetta remained foggy.

I second Duc_et_Pair. The Belgium court has clearly shown that they don't know what they are doing.

Yes, the Royal Family has had moments of unpreparedness and errancies, such as embarrassingly forgetting the permission for Prince Amedeo's marriage. But with Anna Astrid's title of Princess, they have recurrently given the identical information, without any variances, and so there is a clear decision.

More importantly, the birth certificate designating her "Princess" is legal documentation issued by the municipal registry, not the royal court.

Also considering that there are no reliable sources disputing the municipal registration or the information from the Palace, I see no basis for suspecting that King Philippe's intentions were not followed.


When you simply look at the four articles it remains a mystery where that "princess first-name" thing comes from:
[...]
- article 4 covers the descendants in direct lineage to Leopold I: not applicable to Astrid she is a granddaughter to a descendant of Leopold)

But Astrid and Anna Astrid are descendants in direct lineage to Leopold I. Princess Anna Astrid's father Prince Amedeo of Belgium is the son of Princess Astrid of Belgium, daughter of King Albert II of Belgium, son of King Leopold III of Belgium, son of King Albert I of Belgium, son of the Count of Flanders, son of King Leopold I of Belgium.


For the great-grandchildren of the king this means that they rely on the title and name that their lineage entitles them to, which is by their father and not including the prince(ss) of Belgium title,

Yes, Anna Astrid relies on the titles and surname of her father, minus the "Prince of Belgium" title.

Prince Amedeo, Prince of Belgium, Archduke of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)
Princess Anna Astrid, Archduchess of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)
 
Last edited:
Sure they are decreasing the number of Princes/Princesses of Belgium, but giving children from a collateral branch the same title as the main branch is rather messy, I think you all can agree on that. If it is true that the family has started using the German family name again (and therefore the titles as well), than the collateral branches should use lower titles (ducal ones for instance), the way they do in The Netherlands, for example, while still being part of the extended royal family.

I wouldn't present the Dutch as the best example in this case. It has been very messy... with different decisions in each generation.

We seem to have had the difference between the 'prince(ss) of the Netherlands' title that was reserved for children of the monarch and heir; and 'prince(ss) of Oranje-Nassau' for all others but somehow the Dutch parliament decided that prince Constantijn's children couldn't receive the 'prince of Oranje-Nassau' title. If the problem was that he had received his title through his mother not his father, his children should only have been 'jonkheer/vrouw van Amsberg', creating a new noble house (twice, both for Constantijn and a few years later for Friso) with the name 'van Oranje-Nassau van Amsberg' of which the first part is 'count' and the second part is 'jonkheer' was very illogical in my opinion. If that wasn't the issue, his children should have been prince(sse)s of Oranje-Nassau, just like his cousin's children are prince(sse)s of Bourbon-Parma.
 
Also considering that there are no reliable sources disputing the municipal registration or the information from the Palace, I see no basis for suspecting that King Philippe's intentions were not followed.
Is it really just the king's intentions that are important? Wouldn't this be dependent on law? Which is at the very least multi-interpretable.

Yes, Anna Astrid relies on the titles and surname of her father, minus the "Prince of Belgium" title.

Prince Amedeo, Prince of Belgium, Archduke of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)
Princess Anna Astrid, Archduchess of Austria-Este (Habsbourg-Lorraine)
No, she doesn't in my point of view (but I know you think differently). The princess part apparently relies on his 'prince of Belgium' title, so, no she doesn't rely on her father's titles minus the prince of Belgium part for her titles... He is a prince of Belgium, that's why he is a prince. She apparently is called princess because her father is a prince of Belgium, which she shouldn't be (as that is the part of his title that he cannot pass on to his children). Before he became a prince of Belgium he was an archduke first and foremost (and only a prince of Hungary as a secondary title), so she should be an archduke.

Furthermore, do we already know for sure how her mother Elisabetta is to be addressed?
 
Is it really just the king's intentions that are important? Wouldn't this be dependent on law? Which is at the very least multi-interpretable.

My previous comment was addressed to the suggestion that the "Princess" title in the birth certificate and announcements was sloppy writing instead of being the intention of the King and his Royal Decree. It is a different question whether King Philippe's intentions were dependent on law.


No, she doesn't in my point of view (but I know you think differently). The princess part apparently relies on his 'prince of Belgium' title, so, no she doesn't rely on her father's titles minus the prince of Belgium part for her titles... He is a prince of Belgium, that's why he is a prince.

I do think that it is clear from the decrees and Amedeo's birth certificate that the prince title does not rely on the prince of Belgium title.

Have you read posts #199 and #222? I think they address your thoughts.

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...elgian-royal-family-38975-10.html#post2070779
It is a reversion to pre-1891 rules. :flowers:

Before the Royal Decree in 1891, all of the royal Belgian princes and princesses were without a designation.

The report accompanying the Royal Decree stated that the princes and princesses were not called "of Belgium" in Belgium, unlike in foreign countries, where they were referred to by the name "of Belgium".

When Prince Baudouin died in January 1891, there was discomfort with his death certificate because there was no "of Belgium" or characteristically Belgian title on it (while his Saxony titles were recognized on Belgian documents).

The Royal Decree of March 14, 1891 resolved the problem by granting the title of Prince/Princess of Belgium to all of the Princes and Princesses who were in direct male line descent from King Léopold I.

Royal Titles in Belgium - Titres Royaux en Belgique

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...elgian-royal-family-38975-12.html#post2071217

I guess that depends on how you interpret Art. 4 of the 2015 royal decree. Just to provide some context, let us examine first what the previous royal decrees said.

1) Royal Decree of 18/3/1891

"Art. 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui les concernent, les princes et les princesses issus de la descendance masculine et directe de feu Sa Majesté Léopold Ier, seront qualifiés de princes et princesses de Belgique, à la suite de leurs prénoms et avant la mention de leur titre originaire de duc ou duchesse de Saxe.
Les princesses unies par mariage aux princes de notre maison royale seront qualifiées de la même manière à la suite des noms et titres qui leur sont propres
"

2) Royal Decree of 2/12/1991

"Art. 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui les concernent, les Princes et les Princesses issus de la descendance, en ligne directe de S.A.R. le Prince Albert,(...), Prince de Liège (sic), Prince de Belgique, seront qualifiés Princes et Princesses de Belgique, à la suite de leurs prénoms.
Art. 2. L'arrêté Royal du 18/3/1891, qualifiant Princes et Princesses de Belgique les Princes et Princesses issus de la descendance de feu Sa Majesté Léopold Ier, est abrogé."


3) Royal Decree of 12/11/2015

"Article 1er. Dans les actes publics et privés qui les concernent, les Princes et les Princesses, enfants et petits-enfants, issus de la descendance directe du Roi ainsi que les Princes et les Princesses, enfants et petits-enfants, issus de la descendance directe du Prince héritier ou de la Princesse héritière 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. Leur prénom est précédé par le prédicat Son Altesse Royale.

Art. 2. Dans les actes publics et privés qui les concernent, les Princes et les Princesses, enfants et petits-enfants, issus de la descendance directe de Sa Majesté le Roi Albert II 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. Leur prénom est précédé par le prédicat Son Altesse Royale.

Art. 3. Les Princes et les Princesses qui portent le titre de Prince ou de Princesse de Belgique en vertu de l'arrêté royal du 14 mars 1891 qualifiant Princes et Princesses de Belgique les Princes et Princesses issus de la descendance masculine et directe de feu Sa Majesté Léopold Ier gardent ce titre à la suite de leur prénom et, pour autant qu'ils le portent, de leur nom de famille et avant les autres titres qui leur reviennent de droit par leur ascendance. Leur prénom est précédé par le prédicat Son Altesse Royale.

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."

It appears to me that the only reasonable interpretation for the the words "les princes et princesses, issus de la descendance [...]" in all those documents is to take "prince" and "princess" as synonyms of "dynasts", which would be consistent with both French and Germanic tradition. The separate title of "Prince/Princess of Belgium", which implies membership of the royal family and the style of HRH (cf. Arts 1-3 of the 2015 royal decree) applies, on the other hand, only to a more restricted class of persons.

It is also clear to me that "descendance en ligne directe" in those decrees is meant to be descendance both in paternal and maternal line. Otherwise, Art.1 of the 1991 royal decree would not apply to Princess Astrid's children and they would not be Princes/Princesses of Belgium. If the legislator had the intention to constrain the meaning of "descendance directe" to paternal line, then he would have written instead "descendance masculine et directe" as was done explicitly in the royal decree of 1891. The fact that "masculine" was explicitly dropped in the royal decrees of 1991 and 2015 seems intentional to me.

Furthermore, do we already know for sure how her mother Elisabetta is to be addressed?

The royal court has styled her as Princess Amedeo of Belgium and as Princess Elisabetta (never Princess Elisabetta of Belgium).

koninklijkepost.punt.nl
 
Last edited:
My previous comment was addressed to the suggestion that the "Princess" title in the birth certificate and announcements was sloppy writing instead of being the intention of the King and his Royal Decree. It is a different question whether King Philippe's intentions were dependent on law.
Thanks for the clarification.

I do think that it is clear from the decrees and Amedeo's birth certificate that the prince title does not rely on the prince of Belgium title.
It was you who said that her titles derived from her father's titles minus the prince of Belgium title. So, I am glad to see that you agree with me on this issue. The question remains where the 'princess designation' comes from.

Yes, of course. I just question that interpretation - but it's always interesting to read others' interpretations. In short, I agree that the intend is that male and female lineage should be treated the same. So, it is clear that the prince(ss) of Belgium title is to be passed on in female lineage as well. However, since the last decree for non-(grand)children (such as great-grandchildren) this seems irrelevant as the title has been restricted and they rely on their father's (and mother's?) titles (except for the prince of Belgium title).

So, the interesting question would be, which title it is that they are entitled to based on their royal ascendance, as it is NOT the 'prince(ss) of Belgium title... And a royal decree cannot govern other titles (such as the archduke/duchess of Austria-Este title). Some of you seem to suggest that it is the title 'prince or princess' without a designation but that is one I find really hard to phantom. Could it be the S-C(-G) title they are talking about? As the name of king Leopold I is also included as 'of Saxe-Coburg'? So, did any of king Leopold I's descendants already start using a(nother) title based on this royal decree?

I am not trying to say that my interpretation is the right one (I'd say it is still evolving), just would like all of us to acknowledge that it is multi-interpretable and anyone of us could be right or wrong. As we've seen, interpretation isn't straight-forward.

The royal court has styled her as Princess Amedeo of Belgium and as Princess Elisabetta (never Princess Elisabetta of Belgium).

koninklijkepost.punt.nl
So, as I seemed to remember, they haven't been consistent in the way they address her. Early on in the marriage they seemed to actively avoid addressing her with a title.

It is about time that they clearly communicate how they will go about the titles of the wifes of the grand-child princes and the great-grandchildren...
 
What I meant to stress was that the facts of her registration on her birth certificate as "Princess Anna Astrid Marie", and the Royal Court consistently addressing her as "Princess Anna Astrid", are facts on the record rather than mere speculation.

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

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



Some of you seem to suggest that it is the title 'prince or princess' without a designation but that is one I find really hard to phantom.

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



It was you who said that her titles derived from her father's titles minus the prince of Belgium title. So, I am glad to see that you agree with me on this issue. The question remains where the 'princess designation' comes from.

I am slightly confused by your comment. :flowers: When the prince designation does not rely on the prince of Belgium title, the prince designation is capable of being passed on to his daughter without the prince of Belgium title, surely?


Could it be the S-C(-G) title they are talking about? As the name of king Leopold I is also included as 'of Saxe-Coburg'? So, did any of king Leopold I's descendants already start using a(nother) title based on this royal decree?

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

[...] Indeed, the discovery of the social book of 2017, all the descendants of King Albert I recovered the title, except the children of the princess, who take the name of their father, the Archduke of Austria-Este. [...]

La famille royale s'appelle à nouveau Saxe-Cobourg: pourquoi est-ce bientôt la fin des "de Belgique"? - RTL Info

The article is about the yearbook Le Carnet Mondain. Last week Le Soir stated that in the current edition, all of the royal descendants of King Leopold I have gained the titles of "Duchess/Duke of Saxony, Prince/ss of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" - exempting Princess Astrid's descendants and the late King Albert I (the king who renounced the German titles in 1921).
Their wives and husbands do not carry these titles.
The daughter of Prince Amedeo of Belgium is styled "Princess Anna Astrid" with no surname or further titles.
Le Carnet Mondain states that this information was presented to them by the royal palace.
The spokesperson of the royal palace confirmed to Le Soir that the Saxony titles are covered by the expression "the titles which their ancestry gives them the right to", appearing in articles 1-4 of the royal decree of 2015.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom