Royalty in the 23rd Century?

[Albertese]

So I'm watching Star trek V and something occurred to me for the first time. When the new Romulan representative shows up to meet General Koord and Sir John Talbot, I did I mental double take. Sir John Talbot? He seems English. Is he a knight? Is there still an English monarchy in the 23rd Century?

--Alex

 

[O'Dib]

Yes.

 

[Gaith]

Lots of countries without kings, AFAIK, have "prime ministers". Doesn't strike me as too weird that Britain might continue to knight citizens after becoming a republic, if indeed they ever do.

 

[Anduril]

I always thought I heard "St" instead of "Sir". Memory Alpha even says "St".

 

[Bishop76]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's St. Though occasionally, St. is pronounced oddly so you may have heard "sir".

 

[Albertese]

Wait...St. as in "saint?" So, he's catholic? I suppose maybe his parents just gave him a weirdo name and it has no titular significance at all...

--Alex

 

[Gojira]

I have been an avid monarchist for over 30 years. The existing monarchies in Europe are close to, or over, 1,000 years old so I am hopeful and pretty sure that they will be existing 200 or 300 years from now.

 

[Bishop76]

Yeah, I don't see the monarchies going away and I don't see Catholicism going anywhere either, so I don't see why either would be beyond belief.

 

[Sci]

I see no particular reason to think the United Kingdom could not remain a constitutional monarchy within the larger federal systems of United Earth and the United Federation of Planets.

 

[The Badger]

AFAIK the David Warner character is called Saint John, pronounced 'Sinjin'. It's a very rare name. Stringfellow Hawke's brother in Airwolf also had that name.

 

[Bishop76]

Bond also used it in View to a Kill. St. John Smythe.

 

[Aldo]

Bond also used it in View to a Kill. St. John Smythe.

I was about to bring that up until I read your post

And yes he is St. John Talbot, and he does introduce himself using the Sinjin form of St.

 

[Tomalak]

My friend's middle name is St. John. Poor chap.

 

[Brikar99]

Is there some reason we think that Britain of the 23rd century wouldn't still have a royal family? I don't really see much reason why that would go away.

 

[Timo]

...OTOH, I could easily see laws being written against the use of titles of nobility, like in modern Germany. The royal family could be a fairly compact troupe of entertainers, without a country-wide hierarchy of nobility to surround it.

Certainly in the 22nd century, there appears to be something called the Royal Navy, an employer for the Reed family. Although that doesn't prove it serves a monarchy. Might simply be a "serving our nation since the days of those silly kings and queens" thing.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Takeru]

...OTOH, I could easily see laws being written against the use of titles of nobility, like in modern Germany.

There's no such law in Germany. All german noble titles were abolished and the former titles are now part of the last name, i.e. Ernst August Prinz von Hannover (NOT Prinz Ernst August von Hannover), the husband of Princess Caroline of Monaco. That guy has no noble title, although not even most germans realize that.

But as a german citizen you can still use a foreign noble title, there are no laws against it.

BTW, Caroline is styled in other countries "Her Royal Highness The Princess of Hanover", although this title does not exist, she should be styled "Her Serene Highness the Hereditary Princess of Monaco" instead.

A country that has a law against the use of noble titles is Austria, they completey abolished all noble titles and made it illegal to use noble titles (austrian or foreign) or even particles that indicate nobility to be part of austrian citizen's names.
Should James van der Beek for some reason decide to become a citizen of Austria, his name would automatically be changed to James Beek and it would be illegal for him to use his original name on official documents (I think he could still use it as a stage name, but I'm not sure).

 

[Gojira]

...OTOH, I could easily see laws being written against the use of titles of nobility, like in modern Germany.

There's no such law in Germany. All german noble titles were abolished and the former titles are now part of the last name, i.e. Ernst August Prinz von Hannover (NOT Prinz Ernst August von Hannover), the husband of Princess Caroline of Monaco. That guy has no noble title, although not even most germans realize that.

But as a german citizen you can still use a foreign noble title, there are no laws against it.

BTW, Caroline is styled in other countries "Her Royal Highness The Princess of Hanover", although this title does not exist, she should be styled "Her Serene Highness the Hereditary Princess of Monaco" instead.

From what I understand that even though titles are now part of a person's surname in Germany but on a social level much of this is ignored and people refer to the former royals and nobles as if they still held their titles.

 

[Takeru]

That's true, as I said, most germans don't even realize that the nobility was abolished and act like nothing has changed.

It's only really noticable when it comes to marriages. A husband can use the male variant of his wife's former title after their marriage, which would not be possible if it still was a noble title.

 

[JB2005]

Is there some reason we think that Britain of the 23rd century wouldn't still have a royal family? I don't really see much reason why that would go away.

Barring accidents, our monarchy is expected to be able to survive (even without another generation being added) until around the beginning of the 22nd Century.

There's no republican movement in Britain and I can't see one starting any time soon, if anything I'd expect there'll be increased monarchist support over the next few years!

Also FWIW it's no sillier Britain and the Commonwealth retaining the monarchy than the US retaining their president in the 23rd/24th century, which they do according to "Eleven Hours Out" from Tales of the Dominion War!

 

[Albertese]

Barring accidents, our monarchy is expected to be able to survive (even without another generation being added) until around the beginning of the 22nd Century.

Really? If Prince William lives to be 90 he'll die in 2072. That's still a few decades from the 22nd century. Unless he has kids. Does he have kids? Maybe I missed something.

The reason for my initial surprise at the thought is that given the fictional history presented in Star Trek from the 1990's on, I would have assumed royalty would have gone away, especially given the pseudo-communism evident in what we see of Earth and the Federation at large. With the Eugenics wars, WWIII and the following nuclear holocaust, I would have thought the whole social order was radically different by the turn of the 22nd Century.

On the other hand, vestigial monarchies may not be as out of place as I would have thought. After all, Lwaxana Troi was the daughter of the fifth house, holder of the scared chalice of whatever and heir to the holy rings of Betazed, so, I suppose she must have been involved in some sort of hereditary social structure that may well smack of monarchy. So whatever, a sitting crown in London wouldn't be so unexpected.

--Alex