With the wedding of Princess Madeleine of Sweden and Christopher O’Neill on 8 June approaching, the Swedish media has recently speculated about what title the groom might get. At the time of the engagement, in October last year, the royal court stated that an announcement about his title would be made when the wedding date was announced, but this did not happen. Last week the director of the Information and Press Department, Bertil Ternert, said that the announcement will now be made only at the wedding.
The reason for this seems to be that the royal court is not quite sure how to solve the issue. It is up to the King to make decisions about titles for members of his family, and when Princess Madeleine became engaged to Jonas Bergström in August 2009, an engagement which was later called off, it was announced that Bergström, following the marriage, would be styled Duke of Helsinga and Gastricia (while retaining his surname), these being Princess Madeleine’s dukedoms.
Thus it would seem only natural that the same solution would be chosen for Christopher O’Neill, but last week the King’s lawyer, Axel Calissendorff, said to Aftonbladet as well as Svensk Damtidning that in order to become duke or prince one has to be a Swedish citizen. At the time of the engagement it was stated that O’Neill would not apply for Swedish citizenship, but Calissendorff now suggests that it might be possible for him to hold three passports (i.e. American, British and Swedish).
So the likely answer seems to be that if O’Neill acquires Swedish citizenship he will be able to enjoy the style of Duke of Helsinga and Gastricia (and, less likely in my opinion, Prince of Sweden), but that if he does not, he will remain Mr Christopher O’Neill.
On the other hand we know that Princess Madeleine’s title, as confirmed by the court at the time of the engagement, will remain the same as it has always been: Her Royal Highness Princess Madeleine of Sweden, Duchess of Helsinga and Gastricia. Unlike what was the case with her aunts there will be no “Mrs” added to her title, the difference between Princess Madeleine and her aunts being that the former is (and will remain) in the order of succession.
Friday, 19 April 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe a British citizen cannot hold a foreign title. An American citizen can (only current elected officials cannot be given a title, which is why honorary knighthoods are given after the person has left office. There is an American who is an earl, and at least one baronet.
ReplyDeleteBut there are British citizens who hold foreign titles, for instance the Duke of Wellington, who holds Belgian, Spanish and Portuguese titles. However, I believe foreign titles must be recognised by the British monarch for them to be "valid" in Britain (or that the British monarch must give permission for them to be used in Britain).
DeleteI am not sure that those laws would be applicable, as he would not hold the title(s) in his own right. There have been British citizens who have used foreign titles acquired through marriage, including members of the British royal family (e.g. Princess Mary Adelaide, Duchess of Teck; Princess Beatrice, Princess Henry of Battenberg).
DeleteThat is indeed also a point worth taking into consideration, but whether or not the title is in his own right or through marriage I believe the same rule applies that he would need the British monarch's permission for it to be acknowledged in Britain. On the other hand it would obviously be very discourteous if the British monarch refused to acknowledge a title accorded by the Swedish monarch to his son-in-law - if he does indeed become Duke of Helsinga and Gastricia and if Princess Madeleine and her husband were to represent the Swedish royal family at a British event I can hardly imagine the British court insisting on referring to him as "Mr Christopher O'Neill" if he had not asked for permission to use his Swedish title.
Deleteit was changed in 1932 http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/nationalityinstructions/nisec1prosec/titles(foreign)?view=Binary
ReplyDeleteThank you, that is interesting - and complicating. Thus it would not be possible for a ducal title held by marriage by Christopher O'Neill to be formally recognised in Britain. Yet it would obviously be very discourteous if the British monarch in a given situation where Princess Madeleine and her husband were present at a British event refused to refer to him by his Swedish title.
DeleteI am not sure that the document kindly provided by Marlene addresses titles held by marriage to foreign royalty or nobility. While there are wives of noblemen listed in the document, it appears that their husbands are likewise British citizens, although their titles are foreign. (I have not looked up the individual cases, so please correct me if I am mistaken.) A true comparison would be a British woman married to a continental nobleman without British citizenship.
DeleteThe document seems to suggest that the British government merely does not recognize foreign titles held by British citizens - it does not contest the titles' validity in other countries, nor does it actively discourage British citizens from marrying(!) foreign nobles or otherwise obtaining foreign titles.
As for social usage, I think it is clear that the British royal court, like other European royal courts, does not limit itself to using legally recognized titles: Members of formerly royal families are "titled" by the British court as if they were still royal.
Yes, I think that is right - my interpretation of this is also that British citizens are not outright forbidden to hold/accept foreign titles, but that these will not be recognised in Britain. But I do not think you can compare Christopher O'Neill's situation (if he gets a title) to members of former royal families whose titles are used by the British court, as they are not British citizens. But if Christopher O'Neill remains a British citizen AND receives a title, I cannot imagine the British court would refuse to refer to him as such.
DeleteSome of those former ruling families are legally British citizens, according to the Sophia Naturalization act, which was superseded in 1949 by the British Nationality Act. The SNA gave British nationality in perpetuity (until 1949) to the non Catholic descendants of the electress Sophia of Hannover. Prince Philip did not need to be nationalized but at the time, the act had been forgotten. Prince Friedrich of Prussia used it as did Ernst August of Hannover in the case in the mid-50s. In fact, at the time of the 1956 decision, there were about 400 people entitled to a passport and who could file property compensation cases against the Soviets because they were British citizens
DeleteI don't think he will receive his wife's title -- nor do I think the children will be royal. As he has a successful career in the US and UK, it is unlikely that he will be a working member of the Royal Family.
ReplyDeleteTrue, but that is not necessarily the same thing. I think the Swedish court is more concerned with other aspects of the issue, and after all Jonas Bergström, who was also to continue his professional career and not be a working member of the royal family, was supposed to become a duke. Even if he becomes a duke, Christopher O'Neill may naturally choose not to use his title professionally, although his semi-royal status may nevertheless lead to questions being asked occasionally about his role (cf. the situation of the untitled Ari Behn).
DeleteAs a point of clarification, it was announced at the time of both of Princess Madeleine's engagements that her future husband would undertake joint engagements with her, with the question of further involvement left open. (Madeleine herself has an independent career and is not a full-time working member of the royal family, but she undertakes occasional engagements in both Sweden and the US.) Jonas Bergström attended the Nobel award ceremony, and Chris O'Neill has indicated that he will do likewise after marriage.
DeleteI agree with Trond that being a working member of the royal family, or not, is not necessarily to be the paramount consideration when it comes to titles. Many members and relations of European royal families rarely or never work for "the firm," but nevertheless have titles that stem from their royal associations. In Sweden, these include the king’s sisters and the Counts and Countesses of Wisborg.
Yes, but what I meant when I wrote that he would not be a working member of the royal family was that he would not have independent engagements - unlike Prince Daniel, but like for instance Tord Magnuson, who occasionally accompanies his wife to engagements where his presence is natural.
DeleteSection 9 of Article One of the US Constitution (which Article Six says is the Supreme Law of the Land (the USA)) states:
ReplyDelete"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of Congress, accept any present of Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State."
Because Mr. O'Neill is a US citizen and holds an office of Profit in the USA, he may not - without consent of the US Congress - accept a title. If Mr. O'Neill has a financial securities license from the US - as he most likely does - he definitely holds an office of Profit.
Because he wants to keep working in the US, this is probably the #1 reason he did not seek Swedish citizenship and accept a title.
Thank you, that is an interesting observation about the financial securities licence.
Delete