Non-British Styles and Titles


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Exactly, this is the british system of titles, the eldest son of a Peer uses by courtesy the lesser title of the father.
Baronets: a baronet is styled as: Sir John Green, Bt. (or Bart); the son of a baronet is Mr. James Green, and Miss Jane Green is the daughter.
Baronets are not noble because they are nor Peers, they are commoners who inherit the honour of baronetcy with the address of Sir. It is interesting to know that the address of "Sir", used in the uk for knights and Baronets, comes from the latin word "senior" = older.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for your answer!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly, this is the british system of titles, the eldest son of a Peer uses by courtesy the lesser title of the father.
...
Yes eldest sons to Earls and above does, eldest sons to Viscounts and Baron is just The Honourable.
Younger son to Dukes and Marquess are Lord [Insert his first name here], younger sons to Earls and below is just The Honourable
 
That clears it up -- I was wondering about baronets vs. barons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
His Serene Highness Nicolas Sarkozy

As President of the French Republic, Nicolas Sarkozy is also Co-Prince of Andorra with the right to be styled "His Serene Highness." Can he claim any privileges from this or be considered truly a reigning Prince outside of Andorra. Is it only if he were officially representing Andorra and not France? Does this change his status in precedence in any nations? Is it like putting on different hats?
 
If someone in England becomes a Prince/Princess Regent then what is their spouse called?
 
If someone in England becomes a Prince/Princess Regent then what is their spouse called?


The last time Britain had a Prince Regent his wife continued to be known as The Princess of Wales. George IV's substantive titles were still Prince of Wales, Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall etc but he carried out the duties of King.

He wasn't given the title 'Prince Regent' as a substantive title. It was more a recognition that he was doing the job of King but was still a prince. There were no LPs creating him Prince Regent although there was an act that gave him the authority.

If the Queen become incapacitated then Prince Charles would become Regent but his title would still be The Prince of Wales and Camilla would still be The Princess of Wales (not used) The Duchess of Cornwall etc.

If, for some reason, Beatrice became Regent and she was married to Mr John Smith then his title would remain Mr John Smith.
 
Last edited:
The last time Britain had a Prince Regent his wife continued to be known as The Princess of Wales. George IV's substantive titles were still Prince of Wales, Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall etc but he carried out the duties of King.

He wasn't given the title 'Prince Regent' as a substantive title. It was more a recognition that he was doing the job of King but was still a prince. There were no LPs creating him Prince Regent although there was an act that gave him the authority.

If the Queen become incapacitated then Prince Charles would become Regent but his title would still be The Prince of Wales and Camilla would still be The Princess of Wales (not used) The Duchess of Cornwall etc.

If, for some reason, Beatrice became Regent and she was married to Mr John Smith then his title would remain Mr John Smith.

Thank you. I was under the assumption that perhaps the spouse received an elevation in the title department. Guess I was wrong.

You made a point about Beatrice being named Regent. Is there anyway that could happen while Charles was alive? I am not certain if the title goes immediately to him or if there are any more conditions that must be met.
 
Title question

I have a question. Sometimes, a king or queen is only monarch for a short time. Like say for example, the true heir is still a child. So, let's say you have a king who is king until the true heir can be king. Then, the true heir becomes king. What do you call the former king or queen? Do you just use their old title?
 
Are you speaking of a Regent?

According to Wikipedia:


A regent, from the Latin regens "one who reigns", is a person selected to act as head of state (ruling or not) because the ruler is a minor, not present, or debilitated.[1]
In a monarchy, a regent usually governs due to one of these reasons, but may also be elected to rule during the interregnum when the royal line has died out. This was the case in Finland and Hungary, where the royal line was considered extinct in the aftermath of World War I. In Iceland, the regent represented the King of Denmark as sovereign of Iceland until the country became a republic in 1944.
 
Yes, thank you. :flowers: Thanks for merging this. So, what does one call a former regent?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most regents that I am aware of (in the case of Yugoslavia and Belgium) have just gone back to their former titles but sometimes are referred to as the former regent to XXX, Prince Paul of Yugoslavia.

ETA: In the case of Prince Paul, this is what Wikipedia has to say about him:

Prince Paul of Yugoslavia, also known as Paul Karađorđević (Serbo-Croatian: Pavle Karađorđević, Serbian Cyrillic alphabet: Павле Карађорђевић, Slovene: Pavel Karadjordjević, English transliteration: Paul Karageorgevich; 27 April 1893 – 11 September 1976), was Regent of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia during the minority of King Peter II. Peter was the eldest son of his first cousin Alexander I. His title in Yugoslavia was Knez (Knez Pavle Karađorđević), which translates best as "Prince".
 
Last edited:
Thank you. I was under the assumption that perhaps the spouse received an elevation in the title department. Guess I was wrong.

You made a point about Beatrice being named Regent. Is there anyway that could happen while Charles was alive? I am not certain if the title goes immediately to him or if there are any more conditions that must be met.


The only way Beatrice would be Regent while Charles was alive would be if Charles was incapacitated and was unable to carry out the duties of King or Regent for his mother and there was no one else between Beatrice and Charles capable of carrying out those duties e.g. Charles is King, William, Harry and Andrew are dead but Charles has a stroke and can't mentally carry out the duties then Beatrice would be Regent until Charles recovered or died. Physical incapacity wouldn't trigger a regency but mental incapacity would.
 
Thanks for all the information. I didn't think a regency could just "skip" over people but you never know. Beatrice as Regent though hmmm....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A Regent is the next adult, over 18, in the line of succession, which is why I said that those ahead of her would have to be dead (or all incapacitated mentally). It is an highly unlikely scenario but it is still a possibility.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A Regent is the next adult, over 18, in the line of succession, which is why I said that those ahead of her would have to be dead (or all incapacitated mentally). It is an highly unlikely scenario but it is still a possibility.

Thanks for all your help. :flowers:
 
I was wondering, if Charles takes away Harry's HRH or Harry's children, how would it work if Harry had to become King?
 
If he issued new LP's he could, if I remember rightly.
 
Lumutqueen said:
I was wondering, if Charles takes away Harry's HRH or Harry's children, how would it work if Harry had to become King?

I don't see why not. You don't need a title to be in the line of succession so presumably you don't need to have had a specific title to become monarch. If something happens to William before he has children, his titles pass to Harry anyway so he would get 'back' his HRH. In the morbid scenario that the Queen, Charles and William die at the same time, he automatically would become King and his children HRH. I don't think Charles would take away HRH from Harry. Maybe his children.
 
If he takes away Beatrice HRH's which is speculation atm, it would be only fair to take away Harry's.
But if Charles & William passed away, Harry would get the Duke of Cornwall titles etc.
Thank you for the answers.
 
If he takes away Beatrice HRH's which is speculation atm, it would be only fair to take away Harry's.
But if Charles & William passed away, Harry would get the Duke of Cornwall titles etc.
Thank you for the answers.
Not really, If/when Charles becomes King, Harry will be the son of a King, while Beatrice will still be the daughter of a Prince/Royal Duke.

The same would be if William wouldn't grand the HRH Prince(ss) title to the children of Prince Harry (In the unlikely event that William is the King before Harry has children) or if he removes the HRH Prince(ss) title of the children of Prince Harry after he becomes King.

PR
 
Ahh well I think it would only be fair, of course this is all speculation.
Harry will eventually be pushed down to fourth and then fifth in line, and when William becomes King I could certainly see Harry stepping away from royal life.
 
I think the point is that Charles has indicated in the that he would like a smaller Royal Family. And as such he would like to reduce the HRH's (removing Beatrice and Eugenie's). If he does that to them as the children of the 2nd son of a sovereign, then when he (Charles) becomes King...it would make sense that Harry's children would also not have an HRH.

Personally, I don't think that will happen. The royal family will decrease as a lot of the HRH's (the Gloucesters, the Kents) will not continue to the next generation and Beatrice's and Eugenie's kids will also not be HRH's.

Basically, Charles isn't going to take away Beatrice and Eugenie's and than Harry's. Unless Harry of course, prefers it and then he can go away and live in Africa with Chelsy. Which I also don't think is going to happen.
 
Charles can (when/if he becomes King at least) remove the titles. He can not change the order of sucession.
So it wouldn't make any difference at all for the possibility for or results of Harry become King.
UK only remove people from the order of sucession if they becomes or marry a Chatolic, unlike Sweden wher you are removed for being a non-Lutheran(or was that non-protestant), marrying without the Kings and Govermnet permission or being brought up outside of Sweden (not sure about the last I may have confused that with the Danish rules).
 
The more progressive monarchies have different rules, the often-cited example is Princess Maxima of the Netherlands, who was given that title in her own right because Dutch law no longer allows for the wife of the Prince of Orange to be Princess of Orange. She is part of the Dutch nobility with the titles of Princess of the Netherlands and Princess of Orange-Nassau.
 
Why doesn't the Dutch law allow Maxima to share her husband's title?
 
Would Charles be able to take away a HRH?

As The Sovereign, yes. The style and rank of HRH Prince/Princess of the UK is within the gift of the Crown and can be granted or taken away at any time (unlike a Peerage).

The expectation is Charles will issue Letters Patent once he is King replacing the current 1917 criteria for who is granted the style and rank of HRH in the royal family by birth. In the future, royal rank is likely to be limited to the children of The Sovereign and the children of the heir to the throne (whether male or female). Male-line grandchildren would be Lord/Lady Windsor and the great-grandchildren of The Sovereign would be Mister or Miss Surname.

Beatrice and Eugenie would remain HRH for life as would anyone else currently holding the rank. While Charles could indeed remove their royal styles, I doubt he would do so.
 
Furienna said:
Why doesn't the Dutch law allow Maxima to share her husband's title?

It's to designate the heir more clearly as the Dutch have equal primogeniture. Her daughter Amalia will be Princess of Orange in her own right, not because of marriage to the Prince of Orange. Does anyone know if Maxima will be Queen one day or, like her father-in-law continue as a princess?
 
Back
Top Bottom