Financial benefits of "Royal" prefix for Irish organisations?

Rebelheart

I've always wondered this: do Irish organisations which retain the 'Royal' prefix receive a stipend or financial support from the British crown for so-doing?

The vast majority of the organisations which have the 'Royal' prefix in Ireland added it to their original names, so the idea that they are "acknowledging their history" doesn't wash when their original name hadn't got the 'Royal' prefix. I suspect in this day and age it is only being kept for financial reasons.

Anybody know what's the story?

InTheTrees

Rebelheart wrote: »

I suspect in this day and age it is only being kept for financial reasons.

Interesting question but I cant imagine any UK organization budgeting cash to pay their Irish counterparts to keep some royalist title in their name. I cant believe the Royal Academy would be writing a cheque out of their yearly budget to the Royal Irish Academy just to keep "royal" in the name.

I really dont think they care that much. But I could be wrong.

pedroeibar1

@Rebelheart - Familiar with your past ‘anti-anything British’ posts I’m surprised that you do not know the answer. There is no ‘financial benefit’ and there are several false assumptions in your post.

Those institutions that have the ‘Royal’ prefix in their names did not ‘add’ it – the ‘Royal’ is granted by a special charter, is not done lightly (or frequently) and in those countries that had/have a monarchy it usually is seen as an honour. I know of only a few clubs in ‘new’ countries that have dropped it – some, not all, in Hong Kong, also in Singapore and Greece.

Most Irish grants date to the mid 1800’s so the names are a part of a club’s history/heritage of those clubs and today the President of Ireland is the holder of honorary membership ‘ex officio’

InTheTrees

It also makes some otherwise pretty dull organizations look a lot more classy.

Rebelheart

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

@Rebelheart - Familiar with your past ‘anti-anything British’ posts I’m surprised that you do not know the answer.

Being familiar with your past pro-British/anti-Irish posts I'm doubly surprised that you of all people don't know the answer.

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Those institutions that have the ‘Royal’ prefix in their names did not ‘add’ it

This is the sort of ignorance which belies all your claims to be genuinely into history. The Irish Academy of Music, for instance, was founded in 1848. It only added the 'Royal' prefix in 1872. The Society of Antiquarians, later named the Irish Academy, existed long before it was renamed the Royal Irish Academy in 1786. Similarly, the 'Dublin Society for improving Husbandry, Manufactures and other Useful Arts', otherwise known as the 'Dublin Society', was founded in 1731. It was only 1820 when 'Royal' was added to 'Dublin Society'. And so on with so many more organisations adding the prefix 'Royal' to their names when Ireland was under British rule.

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Most Irish grants date to the mid 1800’s so the names are a part of a club’s history/heritage of those clubs and today the President of Ireland is the holder of honorary membership ‘ex officio’

This is the British royalist cult in classic form. Let's completely overlook the club's Irish heritage before it got the 'Royal' prefix. "History/heritage" must never have existed before the English came. "History/heritage", if seems, only begins when the English gave that 'Royal' to the name. Are you not even mildly embarrassed by the anti-Irish bigotry of your view of history and heritage in Ireland?

Rebelheart

InTheTrees wrote: »

It also makes some otherwise pretty dull organizations look a lot more classy.

Perhaps this is so if one is a British pleb and, well, a bit simple or a right-wing British businessman who sees only financial opportunity in British state-run concentration camps, gulags and massacres of unarmed natives demanding civil rights under British crown occupation.

To the civilised world, the idea of an unelected sectarian monarchy living in palaces based upon the savagery of colonialism, as the British one is, is so obviously backward...
But far be it for me to get in the way of an English person and their delusions of "white man's burden" moral superiority over the rest of the planet.

Fratton Fred

Apparently bees pay a fee to her majesty every time they make royal jelly, due to the monopoly she has on the word royal.

Honestly.

Santa Cruz

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Apparently bees pay a fee to her majesty every time they make royal jelly, due to the monopoly she has on the word royal.

Honestly.

That's right. And Brendan Bowyer had to leave the country when he couldn't pay the royalties for the Royal Showband

pedroeibar1

Rebelheart wrote: »

Being familiar with your past pro-British/anti-Irish posts
This is the sort of ignorance which belies all your claims to be genuinely into history.
This is the British royalist cult in classic form. Are you not even mildly embarrassed by the anti-Irish bigotry of your view of history and heritage in Ireland?

Rebelheart wrote: »

This is the sort of ignorance which belies all your claims to be genuinely into history.

This is the British royalist cult in classic form. Are you not even mildly embarrassed by the anti-Irish bigotry of your view of history and heritage in Ireland?

So, it appears that you are trolling again, as you have some information (albeit petty and toxic). I've nothing to be embarassed about, nor am I pro-British, Royal or otherwise. Nor have I shown any bigotry, unlike your comments. As Myles na Gcopaleen said go KMRIA and find somewhere else to play.

Judgement Day

If Rebelheart was drowning would he refuse to be picked up by an RNLI lifeboat? :rolleyes:

Fratton Fred

Judgement Day wrote: »

If Rebelheart was drowning would he refuse to be picked up by an RNLI lifeboat? :rolleyes:

He'd be fecked if it was a choice of that, or a yacht from the Royal Irish or Royal St George sailing clubs!

Best if he avoids Dun Laoghaire completely, because they'd take him across Queens road, in to the Royal Marine hotel!

And as for being treated by a member of the Royal College of Surgeons, Ireland.....

pedroeibar1

Yacht Clubs, Fred, Yacht Clubs. (even the Coal Harbour has a Yacht Club);)
Or fall sick and refuse to be operated on by a MRCSI, having been handled by members of the Royal College of Anaesthetists in Ireland and one from the Royal College of Radiologists. As for treatment in a Royal Hospital? (Imagine the blood pressure!)


Or attend TCD or even UCC (granted a Royal Charter in 1845) or live in a house designed by a FRIAI, using a QS member of FRICS, or an engineer a MIEI or if the cat was sick bring it to a MRVCI?



Would the children ever be brought to the Royal Zoological Gardens? I’ve no doubt that Rebelheart, known for venting bile and spleen, certainly would not be sociable enough to be proposed as a member for any of the Royal Clubs.

riffmongous

Now that you mention it, I do find it strange that certain groups would choose the keep the word as part of their name nearly 100 years after they left the monarchy. Nothing wrong at all with British orgs using it of course. Having a 'Royal' institute in a republic doesn't make much sense though, how would you explain it to a tourist off the top of your head if they asked you why it is called that still?

Here in Austria there used to be something similar, the K.u.K., Kaiserlich und Königlich, the imperial and kingly, which had much the same purpose as Royal, but after the monarchy was gotten rid of it's usage was dropped by all institutions except for a few cafes and bakeries I think.

Judgement Day

It's only people with too much time on their hands that worry about these things while the rest of us concentrate on things that matter. It's easy to knock things down, change things for the sake of it but it's all part of our collective history so why mess with it.

riffmongous

Judgement Day wrote: »

It's only people with too much time on their hands that worry about these things while the rest of us concentrate on things that matter. It's easy to knock things down, change things for the sake of it but it's all part of our collective history so why mess with it.

Hm, I get what you mean, but it's unsettling that science institute's are still using such an outdated name. At this stage I guess it wouldn't make any sense to rename them, but they should have all been renamed after the republic was established I think, like they did in Austria to have a full and clean break from the past.

gobnaitolunacy

I got a Royal Enfield motorbike, I get a fiver from Lizzie at Christmas time.

donaghs

riffmongous wrote: »

Hm, I get what you mean, but it's unsettling that science institute's are still using such an outdated name. At this stage I guess it wouldn't make any sense to rename them, but they should have all been renamed after the republic was established I think, like they did in Austria to have a full and clean break from the past.

Not sure exactly how you mean, but I can't see anything wrong with people keeping a historical legacy intact, if they so choose.

A "clean break with the past" has many connotations, e.g. Pol Pot's "Year Zero". Or why not the Taliban's blowing up of the Buddha statues, since Buddhism had been overtaken by Islam a long time ago in Afghanistan?

Peregrinus

riffmongous wrote: »

Hm, I get what you mean, but it's unsettling that science institute's are still using such an outdated name. At this stage I guess it wouldn't make any sense to rename them, but they should have all been renamed after the republic was established I think, like they did in Austria to have a full and clean break from the past.

Why? There's nothing about the conduct of scientific research or experimentation that requires "a full and clean break from the past".

The fact that an educational or cultural institution in Ireland has the prefix "Royal" added to its name tell us (a) that it has been recognised as making an important contribution to public welfare, and (b) that this recognition came some time ago - pre-1922 - so it's a long-established institution. The only purpose of dropping the "Royal" would be to conceal those facts, and why would a scientist want to conceal facts? The most likely motivation for dropping the "Royal" would be discomfort at the idea that Ireland was ever under a monarchical form of government but, the fact is that it was, and Not Mentioning It is not going to change that.

The dropping of the "K.u.K" designation from Austrian institutions is, I think, not quite analagous. That designation was awarded to institutions which enjoyed official (financial or legal or both) support from the monarchical state, or the patronage of the Emperor. Once that was no longer the case, it was no longer appropriate to use that designation. In fact most of the bodies which had the designation were government bodies, and they had the designation to signify that they had jurisdiction or functions both in Austrian and in Hungary. Institutions relevant to Austria only were "Imperial"; to Hungary only were "Royal" or "Royal Hungarian". And of course the significance of all that disappeared in 1918. Plus it was no longer appropriate in Austria for state agencies to be either "Imperial" or "Imperial and Royal".

The use of "Royal" in Ireland never had the same signficance. The Royal Dublin Society, for example, was never a government or official agency, and the word "Royal" did not imply that it was. In fact, government/official agencies in pre-1922 Ireland tended not to have words like "Royal" in the name, so there was no need for name-changes in agencies like the Department of Agriculture and the Board of Works.

The Royal Irish Constabulary was the notable exception. Originally the Irish Constabulary, they were awarded the "Royal" prefix in 1867 for their sterling work in infiltrating the Fenian Brotherhood and suppressing the rising of 1867. Given this, the prefix would certainly have been dropped in 1922, had the decision not been taken to disband the force entirely and replace it with a newly-constituted, unarmed police force.

riffmongous

donaghs wrote: »

Not sure exactly how you mean, but I can't see anything wrong with people keeping a historical legacy intact, if they so choose.

A "clean break with the past" has many connotations, e.g. Pol Pot's "Year Zero". Or why not the Taliban's blowing up of the Buddha statues, since Buddhism had been overtaken by Islam a long time ago in Afghanistan?

Yes exactly they should have blown up all buildings belonging to institutions using the word royal and disappeared all the members:rolleyes:

riffmongous

Peregrinus wrote: »

Why? There's nothing about the conduct of scientific research or experimentation that requires "a full and clean break from the past".

The fact that an educational or cultural institution in Ireland has the prefix "Royal" added to its name tell us (a) that it has been recognised as making an important contribution to public welfare, and (b) that this recognition came some time ago - pre-1922 - so it's a long-established institution. The only purpose of dropping the "Royal" would be to conceal those facts, and why would a scientist want to conceal facts? The most likely motivation for dropping the "Royal" would be discomfort at the idea that Ireland was ever under a monarchical form of government but, the fact is that it was, and Not Mentioning It is not going to change that.

The dropping of the "K.u.K" designation from Austrian institutions is, I think, not quite analagous. That designation was awarded to institutions which enjoyed official (financial or legal or both) support from the monarchical state, or the patronage of the Emperor. Once that was no longer the case, it was no longer appropriate to use that designation. In fact most of the bodies which had the designation were government bodies, and they had the designation to signify that they had jurisdiction or functions both in Austrian and in Hungary. Institutions relevant to Austria only were "Imperial"; to Hungary only were "Royal" or "Royal Hungarian". And of course the significance of all that disappeared in 1918. Plus it was no longer appropriate in Austria for state agencies to be either "Imperial" or "Imperial and Royal".

The use of "Royal" in Ireland never had the same signficance. The Royal Dublin Society, for example, was never a government or official agency, and the word "Royal" did not imply that it was. In fact, government/official agencies in pre-1922 Ireland tended not to have words like "Royal" in the name, so there was no need for name-changes in agencies like the Department of Agriculture and the Board of Works.

The Royal Irish Constabulary was the notable exception. Originally the Irish Constabulary, they were awarded the "Royal" prefix in 1867 for their sterling work in infiltrating the Fenian Brotherhood and suppressing the rising of 1867. Given this, the prefix would certainly have been dropped in 1922, had the decision not been taken to disband the force entirely and replace it with a newly-constituted, unarmed police force.

Good post, interesting stuff, well then how about the case of the ÖAW instead then, originally founded as the Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien by imperial patent and renamed the Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften after the transition to a republic?

My thoughts are nothing to do with denying the past, but for me a scientific institute should be always more focused on the future (research) than the past, both are of course essential, but the ratio should always be slightly in favour of looking forward, and so to have an scientific institute with a name firmly rooted in a long gone past is strange to me as a scientist.

Edit: The Royal Irish Regiment would be another one similar to the RIC disbanded in the early 1920s

BlatentCheek

If something was called Royal pre-1922 and has continued in existence then dropping it just comes across as churlish. Irish nationalism doesn't have to be unduly petty. Brand recognition for places like RCSI, or continued links to a UK parent organisation such as with the RNLI can be useful.

Founding something new post 1922 and calling it Royal just sounds pathetic however. I don't know if it's a joke but I heard someone founded a Royal Galway Yacht Club a few years back and it made me cringe; I just pictured a shower of crass new-money boggers reaching desperately for anything that might allow them to look down on everyone around them (I know there was a royal charter 120 years ago but the link is tenuous and it's not necessary to call it Royal).

tac foley

Fratton Fred wrote: »

He'd be fecked if it was a choice of that, or a yacht from the Royal Irish or Royal St George sailing clubs!

Best if he avoids Dun Laoghaire completely, because they'd take him across Queens road, in to the Royal Marine hotel!

And as for being treated by a member of the Royal College of Surgeons, Ireland.....

Of course, he'd also be totally f&cked if he fell into the Royal Canal....but one can only live in hope.

tac

pedroeibar1

riffmongous wrote: »

.....well then how about the case of the ÖAW instead then, originally founded as the Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien by imperial patent and renamed the Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften after the transition to a republic?

The Kaiser was made redundant, the Austro-Hungarian Empire was broken up, and the Germans and Austrians (and one of the latter in particular) had other things on their minds. They wanted to send a signal.

riffmongous wrote: »

.......t for me a scientific institute should be always more focused on the future (research) than the past, both are of course essential, but the ratio should always be slightly in favour of looking forward, and so to have an scientific institute with a name firmly rooted in a long gone past is strange to me as a scientist.

Of course science has to look forward, but how can one research the future? Information from the past is studied and used to predict the future. As pointed out earlier most of the great scientific institutions have been around for centuries - the Royal Society was started in 1660 at the Restoration. Its 'Transactions' - articles of analysis on past events/experiments - have been hugely influential in deciding the future in all of the sciences. Papers by 'natural philosophers' were being read to RS members e.g. studies on variolation and innoculation date to decades before Jenner.

riffmongous wrote: »

Edit: The Royal Irish Regiment would be another one similar to the RIC disbanded in the early 1920s

The Royal Irish Regiment still exists. In any case, we are talking 'Institutions' rather than government bodies; the Royal Indian Air Force dropped the 'Royal' in 1947 - in former colonies dropping the 'Royal' appears to be primarily confined to Govt. entities rather than private ones.

pedroeibar1

BlatentCheek wrote: »

If something was called Royal pre-1922 and has continued in existence then dropping it just comes across as churlish. Irish nationalism doesn't have to be unduly petty. Brand recognition for places like RCSI, or continued links to a UK parent organisation such as with the RNLI can be useful.

Founding something new post 1922 and calling it Royal just sounds pathetic however. I don't know if it's a joke but I heard someone founded a Royal Galway Yacht Club a few years back and it made me cringe; I just pictured a shower of crass new-money boggers reaching desperately for anything that might allow them to look down on everyone around them (I know there was a royal charter 120 years ago but the link is tenuous and it's not necessary to call it Royal).

You might be thinking of the Royal Western YC of Ireland

Jawgap

Santa Cruz wrote: »

That's right. And Brendan Bowyer had to leave the country when he couldn't pay the royalties for the Royal Showband

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Apparently bees pay a fee to her majesty every time they make royal jelly, due to the monopoly she has on the word royal.

Honestly.

I like this line of argument - it suggests there is support for the abolition of Meath - instead of the Royal County, we can just call it greater Dublin.

Does this also mean I can't enjoy a quarter-pounder in McDs on the continent - no more "Royale with cheese"!

On a more serious note I think in some circumstances an association with the Crown led to the prefix "Royal" being adopted, such as a member of the royal family patronising the organisation concerned.

On an even more serious note, some "royal" organisations are shared with the UK - the best example is the RNLI - I take it no one is advocating cutting off or excluding that fine organisation for the presence of a hard earned title or because the Queen is patron?

BlatentCheek

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

You might be thinking of the Royal Western YC of Ireland

I was thinking of these http://afloat.ie/sail/events/galway-stopover/item/17236-galway-revives-ancient-royal-yacht-club. Either way I think it's a bit snooty seeking out the Royal prefix when it's not necessary just as it's petty to get rid of it if it's already there.

riffmongous

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

The Kaiser was made redundant, the Austro-Hungarian Empire was broken up, and the Germans and Austrians (and one of the latter in particular) had other things on their minds. They wanted to send a signal.

A signal to who?

Of course science has to look forward, but how can one research the future? Information from the past is studied and used to predict the future. As pointed out earlier most of the great scientific institutions have been around for centuries - the Royal Society was started in 1660 at the Restoration. Its 'Transactions' - articles of analysis on past events/experiments - have been hugely influential in deciding the future in all of the sciences. Papers by 'natural philosophers' were being read to RS members e.g. studies on variolation and innoculation date to decades before Jenner.

That's fair enough alright, just looking at the RIA list of projects they certainly seem to have a different focus to what I am used to dealing with from the ÖAW and IAEA where the focus is on cutting edge science and technology, interesting.

The Royal Irish Regiment still exists. In any case, we are talking 'Institutions' rather than government bodies; the Royal Indian Air Force dropped the 'Royal' in 1947 - in former colonies dropping the 'Royal' appears to be primarily confined to Govt. entities rather than private ones.

I meant the other RIR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Irish_Regiment_%281684%E2%80%931922%29

robinph

riffmongous wrote: »

Here in Austria there used to be something similar, the K.u.K., Kaiserlich und Königlich, the imperial and kingly, which had much the same purpose as Royal, but after the monarchy was gotten rid of it's usage was dropped by all institutions except for a few cafes and bakeries I think.

That sound like it would be similar to the Royal Warants that would be given out to places that supply the royal households with goods and services. Harrods got rid of theirs a few years ago after Al Fayed had a bit of a falling out, and I think they were taken away from the cigarette manufacturers. There was an article earlier this year I saw though where some other brands had decided to drop their warrants, or not reapply for them upon renewal.

tac foley

Anyhow, as ANY right-thinking Irishman [and a few plastics] knows, Royal Meath gets its nickname NOT from any association with British royalty, but from historical IRISH royalty - see - Wiki -

The county is colloquially known by the nickname "The Royal County" due to its history as the seat of the High King of Ireland. It formed from the eastern part of the former Kingdom of Mide (see Kings of Mide) but now forms part of the province of Leinster. Historically, the kingdom and its successor territory the Lordship of Meath, included all of counties Meath, Fingal and Westmeath as well as parts of counties Cavan, Longford, Louth, Offaly and Kildare. The seat of the High King of Ireland was at Tara.

So sssspplllllthththththppppppppp to you, Sir.

tac

riffmongous

robinph wrote: »

That sound like it would be similar to the Royal Warants that would be given out to places that supply the royal households with goods and services. Harrods got rid of theirs a few years ago after Al Fayed had a bit of a falling out, and I think they were taken away from the cigarette manufacturers. There was an article earlier this year I saw though where some other brands had decided to drop their warrants, or not reapply for them upon renewal.

This is one of the places I saw it at, a bakery in Linz http://www.kuk-hofbaeckerei.at/kukhofbaeckerei.htm

Tramps Like Us

tac foley wrote: »

Ah, right, that'll be me then.
<<<MOD EDIT>>>
Meanwhile, back to the thread.........................

tac

Pathetic that you can joke about what you lot got up to in the north - subhuman scum, arming loyalist death squads, murdering innocent people, then joking about it. Sense of adventure? Pathetic.

Wasn't all fun and games in South Armagh for you lot was it?