Titles of the Edinburgh Children


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I have never said anyone else's interpretation is wrong. I have simply asked for a link to an official announcement that Louise and James can take HRH at 18.

I have never disputed the LPs of 1917. I have pointed out that there is an interpretation that says that the announcement in 1999 supersedes the LPs of 1917 and that therefore they don't have that right.

All I have ever asked for is a link to an official site that says this - not that it is wrong or right.

Again Bertie. YOU are the one stomping your feet and demanding links that prove their interpretation is correct. They are giving their opinions based on the interpretation of what they understand of the Letters Patent. You are disputing that interpretation.
Since you have made numerous posts beating everyone up over the issue, why don't you do your own homework and provide your own link that supports your own argument.
 
Please be respectful to your fellow members. Surely we can have a civil discussion without being rude to each other?
 
:whistling:

We could just wait until Louise hits 18, and see what happens...

It doesn't seem that younger generation of Royals hold much store on titles as as the older generation did. Whether she is legally entitled to use HRH Princess Louise of Wessex or not, I doubt very much that she would.
 
It doesn't seem that younger generation of Royals hold much store on titles as as the older generation did. Whether she is legally entitled to use HRH Princess Louise of Wessex or not, I doubt very much that she would.

I agree. And by that time she is going to be so used to hearing "Lady Louise" she might not want to be "Princess"...
 
Again Bertie. YOU are the one stomping your feet and demanding links that prove their interpretation is correct. They are giving their opinions based on the interpretation of what they understand of the Letters Patent. You are disputing that interpretation.
Since you have made numerous posts beating everyone up over the issue, why don't you do your own homework and provide your own link that supports your own argument.


If I could provide a link I wouldn't have asked for one would I? I wouldn't have ever needed to even ask for one as I would have known where to find one - common sense really.

I have said, repeatedly, that I have done a lot of research on this and can't find anything official.

I have provided the interpretation and where I got it from.

All I have ever done is ask if anyone can provide a link to confirm their interpretation.

They can't provide a link - fine.

This is my last post on this issue as it is clear there is no official confirmation of the interpretation that people are giving here.

All people have done is repeat the interpretation - which I have known for years or attack me for asking a simply question.

I won't bother asking any further questions on here as all that people do is attack the asker and call them names.
 
You may have missed my suggestion as it landed on the end of the previous page: Why not write to the Queen/BP and ask? :flowers: Nothing to lose!
 
If I could provide a link I wouldn't have asked for one would I?
No one called you names. You haven't presented anything official to support your own interpretation which you are quoting from two people that you claim are experts on the constitution. Not one person here knows who these people are or where they got their information other than by your own words. Did you ask them for proof? No. Therfore, since they are the experts, then perhaps you should direct your question to them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
...All I have ever asked for is a link to an official site that says this - not that it is wrong or right.
The Queen's announcement is sufficient notice of her will in the matter. Her Wessex grandchildren are styled as the children of a Peer at the request of their parents and that's all that is needed at this time.

The question of whether she has, in fact, removed their right to be HRH Prince/Princess of the UK under the 1917 Letters Patent is unclear. And the intent may have been to leave it ambiguous, knowing change is eventually coming in terms of changing the criteria, leaving that to her successor to decide in the future.

They are not likely to suddenly desire at age 18 to use a royal style and title after growing up without it, so it's probably a moot question anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The entire situation regarding James and Louise Windsor's titles are ambiguous.

On the one hand, the Queen formally amended the LP of 1917 to exclude former wives, other than widows until they remarry, from using the style and title of HRH. The amendment included the former wives of the sons of the Sovereign, the former wives of the grandsons of the Sovereign, and the former wife of the eldest living son of the eldest grandson of the Sovereign. So the LP she issued covers every divorced wife of male members of the royal family entitled to use HRH under the LP of 1917.

On the other hand, there is no known formal LP or amendment that granted the style and title of Princess, to the former Lady Alice Montagu-Douglas-Scott, widowed Duchess of Gloucester. The Court Circular refers to her as "Princess Alice Duchess of Gloucester" starting on 13 July 1974, however; there is no grant of the style recorded at the College of Arms either. Alice received a grant of arms in 1981, in which the Queen sent a letter to the College of Arms specifically referring to her as "HRH Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester". Her Majesty approved armorial bearings that are those of HRH the late duke of Gloucester impaling the paternal arms of Her Royal Highness as previously depicted in the marital arms.

Then you have precedent.. In 1919, King George V issued an amendment to the LP of 1917 for the style and title of HRH Princess Victoria Patricia Helen Elizabeth, formally removing her HRH upon her marriage to the Honourable Alexander Ramsay. After marriage, she was to be known as Lady Patricia Ramsay. The change was effected at her own request, and George V commanded that the change also be recorded at the College of Arms, otherwise the LP amendment was null and void.

So you have two different and equally valid arguments regarding the Wessex children.

Royal styles and titles are a matter of the Sovereign's perogative, and are not subject to the laws of government. This means that the Queen's will and pleasure are all that matters, and she can change styles and titles as she pleases. Current thought is that how this is publicized makes no difference - whether it be by LP, press release, royal warrant or verbally.

But the precedent has been set that removing an HRH from persons entitled to use it, requires an amendment to the LP of 1917. We see it in the amendments made for the Duke of Windsor, Lady Patricia Ramsay, and the divorced wives of the House of Windsor.

Since there have been no LPs issued specifically removing the HRH from the Wessex children, I would say that they still retain the right to use it, if they choose to do so. Legally, they should still be HRH, regardless of whether they are called something different. And indeed, they are referred to in several instances as "Viscount Severn (legally HRH Prince James of Wessex)" and "The Lady Louise Windsor (legally HRH Princess Louise of Wessex)".

It has much the same overtones as Camilla being legally HRH The Princess of Wales, but using HRH The Duchess of Cornwall instead.

I can see both sides of this argument, but only time will tell the truth of the matter. If either Louise or James eventually use HRH then we'll have our answer.. but I don't see why they would, given that the HRH ends with them anyway in that branch of the family.
 
Last edited:
I believe that the legal titles are HRH Princess Louise of Essex should she decide to use it but for now is styled as Lady Louise Windsor at request of her parents -
When Edward becomes DoE after his father dies will his daughter still be Lady (assuming she does not decide to take on her full title) and would James become Earl of Essex then or stay Visscount Severn?

HM Queen Catherine said:
Legally, they should still be HRH, regardless of whether they are called something different. And indeed, they are referred to in several instances as "Viscount Severn (legally HRH Prince James of Wessex)" and "The Lady Louise Windsor (legally HRH Princess Louise of Wessex)".ly.
Yes I have seen this many times!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When Edward becomes DoE (assuming he does and one of the scenarios whereby he doesn't get the title occurs) it will also depend on whether he inherits directly or it is recreated for him.

As the last is the most likely Edward would only be given the Duke of Edinburgh title and so James would use Earl of Wessex as his courtesy title. Edward's titles the would be Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn so James would move up one.

However, if Edward were to inherit the title directly - i.e. Charles, William, Harry and Andrew all predecease Philip then Edward would inherit all of Philip's titles in which case James would use Earl of Merioneth not Wessex as Philip's creation with Earl of Merioneth would be older than Edward's creation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
UKRoyalTitles said:
Hi all

I find the questions of the Wessex children's titles fascinating. In fact I've condenced all the arguments into a blog post. Check it out:

The Wessex question: Are Prince Edward

Your blog confuses me, the grandchildren of the monarch through male line are legally called Prince and Princess and no letters are needed to change that and the Queen can issue a press release stating they can be styled however she likes thus legally the Wessex children are Prince and Princesd and do not lead seperate letters to change that, they'd actually need it to unchange the title legally.....it appears to me you're arguing the opposite but may be I didn't understand your blog
 
Lady Louise and Viscount Severn

When Prince Phillip passes away, Prince Edward and the Countess of Wessex will inherit the titles of Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh. Will Lady Louise and Viscount Severn become the Princess Louise of Edinburgh and Prince James of Edinburgh?
 
When Prince Phillip passes away, Prince Edward and the Countess of Wessex will inherit the titles of Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh. Will Lady Louise and Viscount Severn become the Princess Louise of Edinburgh and Prince James of Edinburgh?


First of all the heir to the Edinburgh title is Charles so if Philip dies before the Queen Charles will become Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich. Then when Charles becomes King the title will merge with the Crown and be available for regrant - which is what was stated in 1999 - that when both the Queen and Philip died and the title merged with the Crown it would be recreated for Edward. There are scenarios whereby this intention is unable to be fulfilled e.g. William has a daughter and then William and Charles die before the Philip making Harry Duke of Edinburgh and the daughter of William the heiress apparent to the throne.

As for the second part of the question why would they suddenly start to use the HRH Prince/Princess titles just because their father has become a Duke? The same qualifications that would allow them to use those styles already exist - they are male line grandchildren of a monarch and thus are entitled to be HRH Princess Louise and HRH Prince James of Wessex now but their parents, with the consent of the Queen, decided they would use the styles of the children of an Earl rather than that of male-line grandchildren of the monarch. By the time Edward probably will be created Duke of Edinburgh they will be the neice and nephew of the monarch (or even possibly the cousins of the monarch), they will be further from the throne and there would be no benefits to them of those styles. James would use Earl of Wessex as his courtesy title however as that would be the second title of his father - and if James has a son while Edward is alive that son would be styled Viscount Severn.

Further options as to what could happen with the Edinburgh title are explained here: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/the-future-of-the-duke-of-edinburgh-title-24343.html
 

This confused me, though I don't think I will ever understand this area of the Royal family.

Does the article mean that when Louise and James are old enough, they can assume their birthright HRH titles? OR because then Queen stated on their parents' marriage, they would be titled the child of an Earl, they can never carry HRH styles?
 
Molly2101 said:
This confused me, though I don't think I will ever understand this area of the Royal family.

Does the article mean that when Louise and James are old enough, they can assume their birthright HRH titles? OR because then Queen stated on their parents' marriage, they would be titled the child of an Earl, they can never carry HRH styles?

They are legally HRH and I've read their parents said that should they want to be styled as Prince/Princess on their 18th bday they could choose to be ...,
 
Will Edwards children use that title when he inherits the Duke of Edinburgh title? (And LONG may Prince Philip live before that happens!)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Will Edwards children use that title when he inherits the Duke of Edinburgh title? (And LONG may Prince Philip live before that happens!)

If and when Edward inherits the title Duke of Edinburgh, Lady Louise's title remains the same - she will still be Lady Louise Windsor. James, however, will most likely be styled Earl of Wessex and it will be the new secondary title to the Duke of Edinburgh, with James' son being Visount Severn. Unless, however, James will use the secondary title currently for the Duke of Edinburgh, which is the Earl of Merioneth I think. Louise, however, will always be Lady Louise as woman cannot inherit Earldom and Dukedoms.
 
The dukedom of Edinburgh will have to revert to the crown before it is re-created for Prince Edward. This also means that the subsidiary titles, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, will also revert to the crown.

When Prince Edward is created Duke of Edinburgh, he will not necessarily be created Earl of Merioneth or Baron Greenwich, and those titles are not included in the official announcement regarding the ducal title.

As Edward is already Earl of Wessex, I think it unlikely he would also receive the earldom of Merioneth.. although he could receive the barony of Greenwich.. and so James would be styled Earl of Wessex when his father becomes the 1st Duke of Edinburgh, 4th Creation.
 
Louise, however, will always be Lady Louise as woman cannot inherit Earldom and Dukedoms.

Well, there have been women who have been peeresses in their own right and I wish Charles would be so modern as to put in the new LP for his brother for a secondary title a reminder for the heirs female of his body, which would allow Louise to inherit a title in her own right after her father's death. She already missed out on the princess-title, so could at least inherit a barony or viscountcy.
 
Well, there have been women who have been peeresses in their own right and I wish Charles would be so modern as to put in the new LP for his brother for a secondary title a reminder for the heirs female of his body, which would allow Louise to inherit a title in her own right after her father's death. She already missed out on the princess-title, so could at least inherit a barony or viscountcy.

I can't imagine that will ever happen. I do hope that Charles will recreate the Duke of Edinburgh title for Edward, as was promised to him by the Queen and Prince Philip. Louise will likely never inherit a Peerage and I doubt she will choose to use her HRH title when she turns 18. I think she'll want to live a normal life, even though being referred to as Lady Louise isn't exactly "normal". James, no matter if he chooses to not use his HRH title, will always have more association with the family than his sister as the Duke of Edinburgh title will have famous history behind it and he will always be associated with his grandfather.

Someone said on another Royal website that in many, many years to come we will see James, Duke of Edinburgh as he'll be most likely be styled that way by then, attending the funeral of the Queen Catherine, the Queen Mother and people will say he is the youngest grandchild of the late Queen Elizabeth II. He'll have a lot to live up to with the title as his grand father is quite a character!
 
Last edited:
It will be interesting to see what these kids end up doing...and beatrice and eugenie as well. Prince Charles has been vocal about wanting to keep the Royal Family small (which makes sense). It gets a bit crazy when everyone gets to be a Princess. The Swedish Royal Family has it figured out - nice and small and compact.
 
It will be interesting to see what these kids end up doing...and beatrice and eugenie as well. Prince Charles has been vocal about wanting to keep the Royal Family small (which makes sense). It gets a bit crazy when everyone gets to be a Princess. The Swedish Royal Family has it figured out - nice and small and compact.


There are very few who can actually be princesses. Currently in Britain only 6 ladies were born princesses (Elizabeth - now The Queen, Anne, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise ??? and Alexandra).

Only two people will have daughters who are princesses in the next generation - William and Harry.

Currently only the monarch, the sons of the monarch and the eldest son of the Prince of Wales can have any children/child who holds the HRH Prince/Princess title meaning that there are only 5 people living who could pass that style to their children - the Queen, Charles, Andrew, Edward and William (Harry will be able to when the Queen dies).

The Queen passed HRH to her 4 children (and needed special LPs to do so for Charles and Anne) and her 3 sons each passed it to their two children. The only other ones who hold it also hold it because they were the children of the sons of a monarch.

If it is limited any further than it is now it will mean that Harry's children can't have HRH so that in the next generation only William's children will get HRH. That will take new LPs of course as the current situation is covered by the 1917 LPs.

I am torn with this. If the HRH's like Beatrice and Eugenie are going to have to do real jobs and not royal ones then they don't need HRH and so only the children of the eldest child on the monarch should get it and not the children of the younger children but if they process continues of only two children for each prince then William will have two children with HRH and they will be the only ones in their own generation.
 
Last edited:
I don't see the point in changing the current HRH.

Let Beatrice and Eugenie keep it, even if they are more private citizens, because they cannot pass it on to their children. And unless they marry peers, their children will have no titles at all.

Once Princess Alexandra dies, the BRF will only have 3 princesses in the realm.

Lady Louise, though technically a princess, does not use the HRH anyway and is unlikely to choose to do so when she turns 18.. and I can't see Viscount Severn choosing it either.

So the only future Princes/Princesses will be the children of William and Harry.. and I doubt either will have more than two or three, unless there is a case of twins.

Charles will not have any more children, and it doesn't look like Andrew will remarry.. nor does it seem likely that Edward and Sophie will have any more (and is a moot point since they wouldn't be styled HRH to begin with).
 
Last edited:
There are very few who can actually be princesses. Currently in Britain only 6 ladies were born princesses (Elizabeth - now The Queen, Anne, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise ??? and Alexandra).

Only two people will have daughters who are princesses in the next generation - William and Harry.

Currently only the monarch, the sons of the monarch and the eldest son of the Prince of Wales can have any children/child who holds the HRH Prince/Princess title meaning that there are only 5 people living who could pass that style to their children - the Queen, Charles, Andrew, Edward and William (Harry will be able to when the Queen dies).

The Queen passed HRH to her 4 children (and needed special LPs to do so for Charles and Anne) and her 3 sons each passed it to their two children. The only other ones who hold it also hold it because they were the children of the sons of a monarch.

If it is limited any further than it is now it will mean that Harry's children can't have HRH so that in the next generation only William's children will get HRH. That will take new LPs of course as the current situation is covered by the 1917 LPs.

I am torn with this. If the HRH's like Beatrice and Eugenie are going to have to do real jobs and not royal ones then they don't need HRH and so only the children of the eldest child on the monarch should get it and not the children of the younger children but if they process continues of only two children for each prince then William will have two children with HRH and they will be the only ones in their own generation.

Thank you for clearing this up. I always had trouble understanding how this particular technicality worked.
 
Back
Top Bottom