Non-British Styles and Titles


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Say a princess who is head of house marries a prince who is also head of a house what title will she be known by the one before her marriage or will she be known by her husband's title?
Such a marriage would unite the two houses in one person in the next generation and a suitable name combination would be made. The title would depend on the seniority or equality of the Houses. One example is the Empress Maria Theresia who married the Duke of Lorraine. She remained Empress of Austria and her descendants took the House name of Habsburg-Lorraine. If Queen Margrethe of Denmark had married a German Fürst she would still be Queen of Denmark and the German title would be relegated to also-ran status.

The question doesn't otherwise apply to the Germanic Houses as Salic Law prevents a female becoming head of a House.
In the present day it is highly unlikely that a Crown Princess of one country would marry the Crown Prince of another.
 
A question about Italian titles or styles. A great-grand-aunt of mine married an Italian Count (he must have been thought so important that no one can remember his name in the family) well his brother was also styled count, and I have seen this a few times the sons of a Marquess or Count all being called by the same title as their father, but sometimes with an "ino" on the end, is this just a respectful and non-meaningful way of addressing these noble offspring?

Hi Menarue, usually in Italy, as in other Countries, the head of the family bears the title...the other members are styled "Nobile dei Conti/Marchesi/etc".
As you know Italians are very generous...so happens that commoners call all members of a noble family with the title of the head, this is why we have so many Conti or Marchesi!!!
I know the Maltese nobility officially uses the word "Contino" or "Marchesino" for the members of the families, because in Malta it does not exist the style "Nobile dei Conti" etc.
 
Well that explains that, the generosity of the wonderful Italian people...
Thanks Count.
 
One example is the Empress Maria Theresia who married the Duke of Lorraine. She remained Empress of Austria and her descendants took the House name of Habsburg-Lorraine.

Maria Theresa was never - never - Empress of Austria because Austria was an archduchy within the Holy Roman Empire during her reign, therefore Maria Theresa was the sovereign Archduchess of Austria (as well as Queen of Hungary, Croatia, Dalmatia, and Bohemia). She became Empress of the Holy Roman Empire when her husband was elected emperor. She was an empress consort and queen regnant, but she is generally known by the imperial title she gained by marriage, because her marital title took precedence over her royal titles.
 
"Dowager" was never a formal part of Queen Elizabeth's title, which is why the need for "Queen Mother" was so strong. It is alright to refer to her as "the dowager Queen of England," but not to say "the Dowager Queen Elizabeth" in formal circumstances.

It has not been alright to refer to anyone as Queen of England since 1707. Using "dowager" as part of a title was a tradition among the peers until the word "dowager" got a negative meaning (old woman) and Queen Elizabeth was a dowager queen styled Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother.

Mary of Teck was also a dowager queen and a queen mother though she preferred not to use any of these titles, as she too believed "it's for old women". :rolleyes: Yet she was referred to as Mary the Queen Mother in the official prayers (http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/Variations.htm).

If The Crown Prince of Someland died, his son would become the new Crown Prince of Someland and he would styled HRH The Crown Prince of Someand. The new Crown Prince's would be styled HRH The Crown Princess of Someland, while the widow would be HRH Crown Princess HerName of Someland. Therefore it's appropriate to always refer to Mary Elizabeth Donaldson as HRH The Crown Princess of Denmark (not HRH Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, because the definite article the promotes the title holder and points out his or her precedence).
 
I didn't know where to ask this or if this has been asked before but when two nobles or royals get married,the woman has a higher title than her husband can she have the option of keeping her title and surname or does she have to acquire her husbands?
 
It depends on the situation if she is a member of a reigning family maybe she has the ability to keep her previous title.But I think if she is a member of a non reigning family she has to acquire her husbands. I tried to answer you question to the best of my ability.
 
I didn't know where to ask this or if this has been asked before but when two nobles or royals get married,the woman has a higher title than her husband can she have the option of keeping her title and surname or does she have to acquire her husbands?

Archduchess Marie Christine of Austria married Count Rodolphe de Limburg-Stirum. Both of their titles are from non-reigning families, so she took her husband's title, and is now Countess Rodolphe de Limburg-Stirum.
 
She didn't give her other titles up (Officially, they don't excist, but that would be besides the point.)

1. She is styled Countess Rodolphe de Limburg-Stirum and
2. She is Countess Rodolphe de Limburg-Stirum, however, if you don't look at the fact that Austria doesn't recognize titles she is

HI&RH Marie-Christine, Countess Rodolphe de Limburg-Stirum, Archduchess and Princess Imperial of Austria, Princess Royal of Hungary and Bohemia.

She can choose if she uses her husbands title or not.

Josette
 
It's strange that she ceased to use imperial, royal and archducal titles in favour of a lowly comital title :ermm:
 
Look at her mother Marie Astrid. She was born Princess Marie Astrid of Luxembourg, but upon her marriage to her second cousin, Archduke Carl Christian of Austria, she became known as Archduchess Marie Astrid of Austria.
 
It's strange that she ceased to use imperial, royal and archducal titles in favour of a lowly comital title :ermm:

She didn't, she 'gained' the title of Countess and can choose to be known as Countess.
 
If The Crown Prince of Someland died, his son would become the new Crown Prince of Someland and he would styled HRH The Crown Prince of Someand. The new Crown Prince's would be styled HRH The Crown Princess of Someland, while the widow would be HRH Crown Princess HerName of Someland. Therefore it's appropriate to always refer to Mary Elizabeth Donaldson as HRH The Crown Princess of Denmark (not HRH Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, because the definite article the promotes the title holder and points out his or her precedence).

She would cease to hold the title of Crown Princess and would properly become HRH The Princess Frederik of Denmark, a Crown Princess is only ever the wife of the Crown Prince and since he is dead in this example she is no longer a CP, but the widow of Prince Frederik
 
My point being that there were other consorts who gave their place away, 2 more in this century QAlexandra and QMary, and they were not called QMother, as they were King mother, that was her special position, being a dowager queen and a mother of the next queen, vs M-I-Law:)

They were still Queen Mother even though their child was a King. They didn't need to go by Queen Mother since no one would confuse Queen Alexandra with Queen Mary or Queen Mary with Queen Elizabeth.

However, it would be easy to confuse Queen Elizabeth with Queen Elizabeth.

A side note, Queen Mary was never called the Queen Grandmother even though she was the grandmother of the Queen.
 
She would cease to hold the title of Crown Princess and would properly become HRH The Princess Frederik of Denmark, a Crown Princess is only ever the wife of the Crown Prince and since he is dead in this example she is no longer a CP, but the widow of Prince Frederik

I wouldn't agree. Widows retain the rank they enjoyed during marriage. One can argue that queen (consort) is only ever wife of king, so that the proper way to refer to her after her husband's death is Princess X of Y. Yet we all know that the widow of Frederick, Prince of Wales, was styled HRH The Dowager Princess of Wales and that the widow of Baldwin of Belgium isn't called Princess Fabiola of Belgium.
 
No these aren't the same though, A dowager Princess of Wales is exactly that and Queen Fabiola is a Queen Dowager but a Dowager Crown Princess couldn't technically exist IMHO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The "Queen Mother" wouldn't have been titled as such if she did not share a Christian name with her daughter.
I don't think so.
She was still the Queen Mother whether she was Queen Elizabeth, or Queen Alice or something?
I know it is to differ from the present QEII. But regardless she would still be the Queen Mother. Lots of wives of kings were never mentioned as the Queen Mother, but as the Dowager. Maybe not used for a Dowager but for a princesss eg. Catharine of Aragon, Joan Of Kent, Augusta Saxe Coburg-Gotha.

Queen Mother is of course simultaneously a former queen consort and the mother of the current monarch.
Which is what Queen Elizabeth was.


As for retaining titles i think CP's would only because they have given birth to an heir.
Obviously they wouldn't be the CP's, maybe until the heir was 18. Mary for instance would after be the HRH The Princess Frederik of Denmark, Dowager Princess I assume because she was never actually a Queen if Prince Frederik died a Prince?
A king then she would be the Queen Mother, mother of a monarch and former consort.
Others may get a customary title like Alexandra did upon divorce. I know Divorce and Death are obviously different.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are a "Queen Mother" if you are The Queen Dowager and Mother of the Reigning Sovereign, therefore Queen Mary and Queen Alexandra were both Queen Mothers and Was Queen Elizabeth. In the case of Queen Elizabeth she didn't like the term Dowager a therfore used Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother to differentiate her from Her Daughter Her Present Majesty.

"Dowager" was never a formal part of Queen Elizabeth's title, which is why the need for "Queen Mother" was so strong. It is alright to refer to her as "the dowager Queen of England," but not to say "the Dowager Queen Elizabeth" in formal circumstances.
At her Funeral she was declared Queen Dowager and Queen Mother by Garter http://www.theroyalforums.com/4778-4778/#more-4778
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lumutqueen said:
I don't think so.
Prince of Chota was referring to the use of the title of Queen Mother.
Although Queens Alexandra and Mary were in turn technically the 'Queen Mother', neither chose to be known as such.
Queen Elizabeth was the third Queen Mother of the twentieth century, but only she was known by this title and in effect made it her own.
She was probably quite pleased with that distinction. :D
 
Last edited:
I suppose Mary and Alexandra had no need to use the title, but in State Prayers they were referred to as such and I have seen many references to them as HM The Queen Mother from publications at that time. So the title must have been used by some press and public when referring to Their Majesties.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh yes, it was used in some form as it was an official designation. I've seen references to the "Dowager Queen Mary" as well, just as you have recorded the use of "Queen Dowager and Queen Mother" by Garter in your post above. Because we are familiar with certain usages it can appear unusual or even odd when we see the formal or official designations in print.
 
Thanks everyone for answering my question.:flowers:

Since Marie-Astrid was from a reigning royal family could she have chosen to not take Carl-Christian's title?or is that looked down upon with the royals?Like when us "commoners" get married and choose not to take our husbands last name.:)
 
HellO!! Do you know if an Imperial Highness is "more" important than a Royal Highness?

Regards!!
 
Imperial Highness traditionally outranked Royal Highness, as emperors and empresses traditionally outranked kings and queens.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Since Marie-Astrid was from a reigning royal family could she have chosen to not take Carl-Christian's title?or is that looked down upon with the royals?Like when us "commoners" get married and choose not to take our husbands last name.:)
I've actually never saw "Archduchess" Marie-Astrid listed as anything other than Princess Marie-Astrid of Luxembourg with Habsbourg titles afterward but not before her Luxembourg status in anything official. Most of the events she attends are in relation to Luxembourg and she is always listed as Princess of Luxembourg there. Carl-Christian doesn't actually have a title only his wife does. She retains her title and precedence as the eldest daughter of Grand Duke Jean. Carl-Christian actually takes his rank from Marie-Astrid you can see this from events in Luxembourg where the whole extended family is in attendance. The Marie-Astrid family will immediatley follow behind the children of Henri and Marie-Theresa.

No she did not have to take Carl-Christian's title or even his surname. If Princess Alexandra were to marry an ordinary man I sincerly doubt you would see her listed as anything other than HRH Princess Alexandra of Luxembourg. There is a reason that it is mentioned in the decrees concerning titles in Luxembourg that Princess who married without consent becomes a Countess de Nassau. In my mind this implies that even female members of the family will retain their titles. "Common" Luxembourg women generally combine their surname with that of their husband. I actually read a study on female usage of their husband's surname in Europe and Luxembourg was listed as one of the countries where it is automatically assummed that a wife will either take her husbands name or combine it with her own. I doubt it is a problem for Marie-Astrid or Carl-Christian since they are both decendants of the Luxembourg family, afterall.

Personally, I want to take my husbands name but at the same time it feels rather awkward to think of having someone's surname, IMHO. I imagine it takes some getting used to.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does it letters patent decide which title the children hold regardless of who is head of a house reigning or non reigning?
 
Letters Patent are a UK process. Other countries use royal decrees or even have titles of members of their houses defined by their respective constitutions, family pacts or house laws. In some countries such as Belgium where titles for those of the blood royal in the line of King Albert are defined by the constitution but no such provision exists for spouses so both the constitution and the royal fons honorum are used.


For non-reigning houses it varies greatly. In some cases old House Laws are used. Largely the head of the respective house governs title usage. Some houses require equal marriage (with relaxed standards now-a-days) and others only require approval of the head of the house.

All of Grand Duke Jean's daughters and even his sisters made good matches. It seems it is only the Luxembourg Princes who are interested in commoners as their Princesses have stuck to noble/royal matches with only the exception of GD Jean's niece Princess Charlotte coming to mind. There is no doubt that the marriage of Princess Marie-Astrid of Luxembourg and Archduke Carl-Christian of Austria received the approval of both Archduke Otto and GD Jean and GDss Josephine-Charlotte.
 
Back
Top Bottom