The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2041  
Old 03-30-2013, 06:00 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
[QUOTE=Lumutqueen;1533915]From her husband death in 1952 to her death in 2002, The Queen Mother's title was Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. Where's the Princess? [QUOTE] At her funeral in 2002 when the QMs titles were read out she was called Princess Elizabeth, Queen Mother and Queen Dowager etc
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2042  
Old 03-30-2013, 06:05 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by littleboo View Post
May I ask what the two different interpretations are? Royal styles and titles are a matter of Royal Prerogative and not open to interpretation. HM can change styles and titles as she pleases and HM may express her will and pleasure in whatever way she deems appropriate. Letters Patent being just one of the ways, as is a press release, Royal Warrant or verbal decree. I can provide examples if need be.

I stated it in the post to which you replied and in my previous post:

1. Some people argue that because no LPs were issued that in effect Louise and James, as male-line grandchildren of the monarch, are HRH Prince/Princess but not using that styling under the 1917 LPs.

2. Others argue that all that is needed to deprive them of the style of HRH Prince/Princess is the Queen's will being made known - which we know she did in 1999.

Arguing by using the giving of a style isn't the same as the revoking of a style. To deny Wallis the style of HRH as the wife of an HRH was specified in LPs but that may have been because David didn't want it as much as the need to deprive someone of that style by LPs whereas with Louise and James the deprivation is in line with the parents' wishes - which is also why others argue that in fact they are a Prince and a Princess as they should have the right at 18 to take on the style they are entitled to under the 1917 LPs.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2043  
Old 03-30-2013, 06:18 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,371
I've always seen the titles of Louise and James the same as Camilla. There is a "higher" title by right, but the choice (as opposed to rule, law, LP etc.) has been to use the lesser title.

Is that too simplistic?
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #2044  
Old 03-30-2013, 06:21 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
...Is that too simplistic?
Nope. That pretty much sums it up neatly.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #2045  
Old 03-30-2013, 06:31 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,442
No - it ignores The Queen's will being made known and that is the crux of the matter - has she actually deprived them of their HRH Prince/Princess by making her will known in this matter or hasn't she.

It isn't a matter of them having a 'higher' style but rather whether they still have HRH at all.

Camilla is using one of Charles' titles - can't be deprived of one without being deprived of them all and she hasn't been so she holds all of them but in the case of Louise and James we aren't sure - has the Queen stripped them of their rights under the 1917 LPs or not?

That is what the issue is about.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2046  
Old 03-30-2013, 06:56 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
She hasn't said in any way whatsoever that 'the children of The Earl and Countess of Wessex will not ever be allowed to use their rightful titles as Prince and Princess' or did I miss that announcement?

They are using Lady and Lord (if James didn't have a title) to keep under the radar and out of the limelight, when they come of age I imagine they will get a choice.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #2047  
Old 03-30-2013, 07:02 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,442
You are missing the point.

The point is: what does she have to do to deprive them of their rights under the 1917 LPs?

There are two arguements:

1. Issue new LPs - she hasn't done that - your argument.

OR

2. Let her will be known - has she actually done that in allowing them to use the styles of an Earl - that is the alternative interpretation - that she has actually deprived them based on letting her will be known.

The evidence for the above is this:

We all know that HRH The Duchess of Kent prefers to be known as Katherine Kent but how is she referred to in official communiques such as the CC - HRH The Duchess of Kent. How has Louise been referred to in that same communication - Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor.

We can go round and round on this - as we have done before - the simple answer is that there are two interpretations of what has happened and both have evidence to support those interpretations.

James doesn't have a title - he is allowed, by convention, to use one of his father's titles. People with titles are peers of the realm - James isn't.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2048  
Old 03-30-2013, 09:53 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro and Petrópolis, Brazil
Posts: 1,124
Using that argument, Camilla isn't the Princess of Wales, because she's referred as HRH The Duchess of Cornwall at Court Circular and other official documents.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2049  
Old 03-30-2013, 10:22 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire View Post
Using that argument, Camilla isn't the Princess of Wales, because she's referred as HRH The Duchess of Cornwall at Court Circular and other official documents.
The Duchess of Cornwall is what she is known as so that is what is used for the CC. In Scotland though, Charles is known as the Duke of Rothesay and Camilla as the Duchess of Rothesay. :) It just happens that Camilla had a few of Charles' titles she could choose from to be known as. Doesn't mean she doesn't hold the other titles legally. I supposed if she really wanted, with the Queen's approval, she could be known as The Princess Charles even.
__________________
“We live in a world where we have to hide to make love, while violence is practiced in broad daylight.”
~~~ John Lennon ~~~
Reply With Quote
  #2050  
Old 03-30-2013, 10:40 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,116
^^^ And by that very logic, just because Louise is known as Lady Louise in the CC doesn't mean it's her only title/styling.

The point is that we don't know for sure, one way or the other, if Louise and James are simply a Lady and a Lord or if they're also a Princess and a Prince. And in all honesty, we probably won't ever know for certain - unless Charles as king issues LPs to change the conditions under which the title/style is issued.

Right now we could say that Louise is simply a Lady and doesn't hold the title Princess. Or we could say that she is both and just uses the Lady as her primary, much like how Camilla uses the Duchess of Cornwall as her primary. When Louise turns 18 she may decide she wants to be known as a Princess - in which case we will be lead to believe that it's been her title all along, and she's only now using it. Or it could be that it hasn't been her title at all, but HM is choosing to restore it to her as her right, because after all this is her granddaughter (and one she's fairly close with at that).

The point of the matter is that the only people who know for sure whether or not Louise and James are in fact a princess and a prince are the members of the family. In my opinion, I think it's probably safer to say that they are and just continue to refer to them as their parents have said they want to be called, until such a time as we are given verifiable proof that they are not a princess and a prince.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2051  
Old 03-30-2013, 11:46 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire View Post
I believe Lady Louise and Viscount Severn will have the right to choose, when they become adults, if they want to be a Princess and a Prince.
But I believe they'll choose to stay just as children of an Earl. Eventualy, the Earl of Wessex will become the Duke of Edinburgh, and they'll become children of a Duke.
Perhaps. But more likely, The Queen simply announced the change for now, leaving it to her successor to issue Letters Patent modifying the criteria of the 1917 Letters as to who will enjoy the style and rank in the future.

I predict HRH will be limited to the children of The Sovereign, the children of the heir to the throne, and the children of the eldest child of the heir. The male-line grandchildren will be styled as children of a Duke, and the male-line great grandchildren will use surnames.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Lady Louise is a Princess by virtue of the fact she's the daughter of a male line child of the Monarch...
My interpretation is Louise and James legally remain HRH because the 1917 Letters Patent automatically entitle them to that status. At the request of their parents, they are styled as the children of an Earl with The Queen's consent.

Since Letters Patent are an instrument of law from the Crown, it would require new Letters Patent to deprive them of their right to royal rank at birth. The Queen's announcement simply states what her Will is in terms of how they are styled, but does not remove their right to princely status.

As such, they are automatically HRH Princess Louise and HRH Prince James at birth, but are not currently using that style. Instead, they are known as The Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor and Viscount Severn with the consent of The Sovereign.

The Queen's Will is all that is required in determining what style the members of the royal family use or hold. Only if created a Peer does the person then have a title, which could only be removed by an Act of Parliament.

HRH Prince/Princess are courtesy styles that can be conferred or removed at any time by The Sovereign and Letters Patent are a formality. There is no constitutional basis for a princely dignity or royal rank.
.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2052  
Old 04-09-2013, 05:33 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro and Petrópolis, Brazil
Posts: 1,124
Is the Queen still the Duchess of Edinburgh?

Of course the title of Queen is higher than Duchess of Edinburgh, but is Her Majesty entitled to use this title, as the wife of the Duke?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2053  
Old 04-09-2013, 05:54 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736

No. The Sovereign is the fount of all honours and she cannot hold the title of a wife of a Duke as a reigning Queen. Her husband was granted precedence and place next to HM, but he is a Peer and Prince of the UK, making him her subject.

If she abdicated the throne, she would again be HRH The Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh as the daughter of The Sovereign and wife of a Duke.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2054  
Old 04-09-2013, 06:18 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
I have seen almost all vintage videos of BRF (Pathe/BBC) on Youtube, and read pretty much regarding news and reporting of late 40s and early 50s, I can say pretty confidently that NO WHERE HAS Princess Elizabeth been referred to as Duchess of Edinburgh, before her accession.
She was always referred to as The Princess Elizabeth.
Even if they attended together, they were always mentioned as Princess Elizabeth and The Duke of Edinburgh, NEVER EVER as The Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh.
(I actually long to see one reference of her as Dss of E, something practical, other than Wiki).
So though she is automatically the DssOfE the moment she married The DoE , that title is absolutely irrelevant in her case, past, present or future..
__________________
The only word I hate in the Royal Dictionary - ABDICATION
Reply With Quote
  #2055  
Old 04-09-2013, 06:32 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,442
The documents my mother has from the expected tour of Australia in 1952 refer to them as TRH The Princess Elizabeth, The Duchess of Edinburgh and The Duke of Edinburgh - official documents from the UK to the British High Commission in Canberra. The books I have about their family life at that time as well - TRH The Princess Elizabeth, The Duchess of Edinburgh and The Duke of Edinburgh at Home.

The Court Circular in The Times from a number of dates in the late 40s and early 50s that my mother kept for different reasons also refer to her as TRH The Princess Elizabeth, The Duchess of Edinburgh..

Like Kate is often called Kate or Andrew, Andrew colloquially she was still called Elizabeth or The Princess Elizabeth but official HRH The Princess Elizabeth, The Duchess of Edinburgh.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2056  
Old 04-09-2013, 06:47 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
She was always referred to as The Princess Elizabeth.
Even if they attended together, they were always mentioned as Princess Elizabeth and The Duke of Edinburgh, NEVER EVER as The Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh.
I have seen/heard videos where Princess Elizabeth was referred to as the Duchess of Edinburgh. Among them, is the BBC announcement of the birth of her son.

BBC - Archive - Princess Elizabeth - The Birth of HRH Prince Charles
Reply With Quote
  #2057  
Old 04-09-2013, 06:52 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,371
From the responses to the original question "Is the Queen still Duchess of Edinburgh" - the responses that say yes all seem to refer to her when she was Princess Elizabeth. So I understand HRH PRincess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh, in the same way I understand HRH Princess MArgaret, Countess of Snowdon.

BUT - once she became Queen - does this still apply? Can a Monarch still carry the title of the wife of a peer (I know that they cannot be a peer in their own right).
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #2058  
Old 04-09-2013, 06:59 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Her Majesty was the Duchess of Edinburgh only until her accession to the Throne. Once she became a Queen, she - as a Monarch - also became the fount of all honours and as such could not hold a peerage title of her own, or one by marriage.
Reply With Quote
  #2059  
Old 04-09-2013, 07:30 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
Thank you Artemisia and cepe for clearing that and that BBC source.
This is the first one I heard of her being referred to as DssOfE. I missed it bcos it wasnt a vid on Youtube..
__________________
The only word I hate in the Royal Dictionary - ABDICATION
Reply With Quote
  #2060  
Old 04-09-2013, 08:38 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
She was referred to as The Princess Elizabeth as the heiress presumptive and eldest child of George VI. However, she was also The Duchess of Edinburgh as the wife of a Peer.

Obviously, as the heir to her father, her own royal rank and style took precedence over her title as the wife of a Duke, but she held both.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, consort, spouse, styles and titles


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess Prince Harry and Prince William 1110 07-12-2014 10:00 PM
Questions About [non-British] Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 717 05-17-2014 05:44 PM
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 573 11-14-2013 11:59 AM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 36 08-08-2013 12:05 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn Abdication & Inauguration 2013 67 05-24-2013 03:14 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events dutch royal history engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:50 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]