QuotePrince Andrew first wanted his daughter, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie to become full-time working royals. However, Prince Charles, who is hoping in streamlining the monarchy when he is King felt that the two should not be given the taxpayer-funded role.
It is now being reported that Prince Andrew is asking for earldoms for his future son-in-laws, ensuring that any future grandchildren will not be "commoners".
While Princess Beatrice is recently single, it is expected that Princess Eugenie and her long-term partner, Jack Brooksbank are expected to announce their engagement in the near future making time of the essence for Prince Andrew to secure those titles.
Read more:
Prince Andrew now wants titles for his future son-in-laws – Royal Central (http://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/yorks/prince-andrew-now-wants-titles-for-his-future-son-in-laws-73005)
IMO this is not the wisest choice and it's time for Andrew to end this campaign. His sister and former brother-in-law opted to decline a title for Mark Phillips. Peter and Zara have done well in life without titles as well. Plus I don't get the feeling that either of his daughters' care about their future husbands/children having titles.
The problem is Andrew and his sense of importance. Andrew was born second in line to the throne and it is said he was HM's favorite child. Now even though he is the second son of the Sovereign he has become a minor royal as he is now number 6 in line to the throne. Andrew has always been very arrogant but he fails to realize this is not the first time this has happened in the RF. When Princess Alexandra married Angus Ogilvy he was the second son of the Earl of Airlie and their children are not titled. His Sister Anne declined titles for her children and she is the daughter of a Sovereign not a grandchild as Alexandra was. Andrew is not the classiest man in the world and his continuing ties with Sarah who milks that title for all it is worse has created problems for their daughters though Beatrice it appears would care she is as bad as her parents.
Andrew has denied the rumour in the tabloids about his wanting titles for his sons in law, so some members of the BRF has begun fighting back over things like this. The 'never complain, never explain' rule the Queen, Prince Philip have followed all their lives doesn't really work in an age of modern media, when a rumour can spread over the Internet in a matter of minutes. It certainly doesn't work if you have a reputatation of being a self-important pompous prat like Andrew.
Anyway, the statement is below.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/09/duke-york-issues-extraordinary-personal-denial-rift-prince-charles/
Fergie also made a charity evening all about her again when she complained about the Yorks being bullied. The charity should be the centre of everything but not with this woman!
@Curryong-While the "never explain, never complain" motto worked for past generations, I can understand why some members of the BRF are choosing to respond to false allegations in today's era of social media.
If Prince Andrew's son-in-law would get a title, would this be an inactive title brought back to use or a completely brand new created title?
It's very unlikely that his sons-in-law would get a title considering that the husbands of Princess Alexandra and the Princess Royal refused them. Earl Snowden was the last to accept a title when he married Princess Margaret in 1960 and his was created for him.
And to add to TLLK's post, how did that end up with Margaret divorcing?
here does it end?
Everyone, have a title!!!
If Bea and Eug's husbands, lets say get a title, then they divorce and these men remarry, then the 2nd wives would titled ?
Bea and Eug's next husbands would need to be titled to titled too?
Maybe Bea and Eug want more of a place in the BRF like to PW and PH and maybe they do not? Maybe it is really Andrew and Sarah fighting their battles.
PA was ahead of the curve when she refused titles for her children, frankly Andrew and Edward should have "read the room" so to speak and this would all be moot.
Edward did ok naming his children, titles, but not Prince and Princess. Lady and viscount Severn, better.
Easier for them and yet rightly so some title. I think Anne was smart, yet she could have given them titles, Lady and Viscount Severn, or something else.
Andrew took on the strongest of titles , Princess, for his girls and it is not working out well for them.
However the Letters Patent have not been altered so as the children of a royal duke who is the child of a reigning monarch they were always going to be known as Prince/ Princess _______of York. Technically Louise and James are actually Princess Louise and Prince James, but their parents agreed to have them use the style of an Earl's child when the Wessexes married in 1999. There is some talk that should Edward ultimately become Duke of Edinburgh at Phillip's passing that they might begin using those titles. All speculation of course because the Edinburgh title should actually go to Phillip's eldest son. :shrug: We'll just have to wait and see.
You know I think that the press likes a good old battle royal. If they cannot find one, they create it. For a long time they have tried to create this conflict between Charles and Andrew. Yes Andrew can be an entitled so and so; but I seriously doubt he would demand titles for his future son-in-laws.
I wholeheartedly agree
@royalanthropologist . Headlines stating "Charles and Andrew Have a Close Bond" will not sell papers or gain clicks on online articles.
I very much doubt Charles and Andrew have a close bond whatsoever. IMO the only thing they can both "bond" over is embarrassing themselves and their titles.
Doesn't sound true. I think the Yorks will fade from the royal if Charles becomes King.
With Lord Snowdon dying, I saw in the articles that his NEXT wife he married was titled due to his title and their child was titled Lady.
In the land of titles, titles matter a lot.
Goo Pippa Midds!! She got one !!!! lady Glynn whatever it will be one day when JMatthews parent pass away. Minor title, bought title or something via Matthews family, yet titled still.
meanwhile, QEII's grandchildren by Anne had no titles.
Snowdon and his 2nd wife and their child was no BRF, no relation to QEII.
He did not need a title being PM's husband. Look what happened.
Yes the title of Countess of Snowdon would have passed to his second wife when they married. She's now the "Dowager Countess" while David's wife Serena will be the current Countess of Snowdon now that he's inherited the title from his late father.
Snowdon married Marg over 50 years ago. at that time, it was considered thtat as the husband of the queens sister he should have a title. in fact as I recall he only accepted one when Marg was pregnant and the RF or PTB felt that the queens nephew if he had a son, should not be untitled. Mark Phillips marrying Anne some ten years later, would not accept a title tho' its said that the queen again wanted him to have one when he had children. I doubt if Andy has been asking for his daugthers husbands to have earldoms, he is stupid but not a complete fool.. and he knows that it would not be acceptable. And yes of course the press likes to make up stories of conflict. If there's no "kate and WIll are getting on badly", kind of stuff, there can be conflict "between the silbings". And perhaps they shy away now from too many "martial problems" stories, after there was such a tragic marital problem with Charles and Diana.