The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3121  
Old 09-04-2017, 11:49 AM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 274
I have several questions about the Prince/Princess title which I will put in boldface. I have been reading books recently on the British Royal Family. I just finished two on Queen Mary. It seems that back then the titles of Prince/Princess were more liberally given out. Maybe I am just misunderstanding because, honestly, I get so confused sometimes on who is who in those books that I have begun to keep lists every time a person is mentioned for the first time so that I can remember who they are. What are the rules for who is given the title of Prince/Princess in the BRF? I know that Princess Anne refused titles for her children and heard that Edward and Sophie did not want their children to be Prince/Princess. So why are Bea and Eugenie princesses? Also, I know the Queen made sure that William and Kate's children would be Prince/Princesses. If she had not done so, would their titles have changed to Prince/Princess upon William's succession to the throne? It seems to me that it would be easier just to make a rule saying that those people in direct succession to the Throne that cannot drop down in line due to the birth of someone else are prince/princess. It is just all so confusing to me and I want to understand. Thanks.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3122  
Old 09-04-2017, 12:08 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Peru
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by duchessrachel View Post
What are the rules for who is given the title of Prince/Princess in the BRF? I know that Princess Anne refused titles for her children and heard that Edward and Sophie did not want their children to be Prince/Princess. So why are Bea and Eugenie princesses? Also, I know the Queen made sure that William and Kate's children would be Prince/Princesses. If she had not done so, would their titles have changed to Prince/Princess upon William's succession to the throne? It seems to me that it would be easier just to make a rule saying that those people in direct succession to the Throne that cannot drop down in line due to the birth of someone else are prince/princess. It is just all so confusing to me and I want to understand. Thanks.
There are very clear rules:
- Children and male-line grandchildren of the Sovereign are HRH with titular dignity of prince or princess
- The children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales are also princes and princesses (until recently the rule was that the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales was also a prince, but the Queen has extended this to all his children)

So, to clarify the current situation:
- Peter and Zara were never to be Royal Highnesses with the titular dignity of Prince and Princess; if their father had accepted a (noble) title, their titles would have derived from his titles.
- Beatrice and Eugenie are entitled to HRH and princess as male-line grandchildren of the Sovereign.
- Louise and James were entitled to HRH and prince(ss), however, the Queen decided otherwise and that is why they are now known als Lady Louise and Viscount Severn (as children of a normal earl)
- George would have been HRH prince George of Cambridge independent of the Queen's Letters Patent; Charlotte (and her future brother/sister) would have been Lady (or Lord) until their grandfather's (so Charles', not William's!) ascension to the throne had the queen not issues the Letters Patent.

Something you didn't ask, but might wonder: Harry's children won't be HRH and prince(ss) under the Queen's reign, the eldest son will take his father's secondary title and the others will be known als Lord and Lady Mountbatten-Windsor. According to the current rules, they will become HRH and prince(ss) when Charles ascends the throne (if he never does and William becomes King instead, Harry's children will never be entitled to HRH and prince(ss)); however, we've seen with the children of Edward and Sophie that this is not a given (the Sovereign can always decide otherwise), so we have to see how it all plays out.

Hope this clarifies; if not, feel free to ask further questions.

Moderators, could you please move the question above and my answer to the appropriate thread as this is about the British and not the Swedish royal family titles. Thanks!
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3123  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:11 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,899
I would be very surprised to not see Harry's children made HRH if the Queen is still alive when they are born...UNLESS he objects to the titles.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #3124  
Old 09-04-2017, 01:36 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 1,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by duchessrachel View Post
I have several questions about the Prince/Princess title which I will put in boldface. I have been reading books recently on the British Royal Family. I just finished two on Queen Mary. It seems that back then the titles of Prince/Princess were more liberally given out. Maybe I am just misunderstanding because, honestly, I get so confused sometimes on who is who in those books that I have begun to keep lists every time a person is mentioned for the first time so that I can remember who they are. What are the rules for who is given the title of Prince/Princess in the BRF? I know that Princess Anne refused titles for her children and heard that Edward and Sophie did not want their children to be Prince/Princess. So why are Bea and Eugenie princesses? Also, I know the Queen made sure that William and Kate's children would be Prince/Princesses. If she had not done so, would their titles have changed to Prince/Princess upon William's succession to the throne? It seems to me that it would be easier just to make a rule saying that those people in direct succession to the Throne that cannot drop down in line due to the birth of someone else are prince/princess. It is just all so confusing to me and I want to understand. Thanks.
You can find all rules on these pages:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_prince
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_princess
Reply With Quote
  #3125  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:25 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 4,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
I would be very surprised to not see Harry's children made HRH if the Queen is still alive when they are born...UNLESS he objects to the titles.


LaRae


The more children that the Cambridges have Harry's children get pushed more and more into the Beatrice and Eugenie zone of not really needed. It would not be too shocking if Harry's went the same route as Edward and Sophie with no HRH for the kids.
Reply With Quote
  #3126  
Old 09-04-2017, 02:27 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,394
Frankly with Henry, I would be surprised if his children had HRHs. They don't need them, and they'll have a better life without them.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #3127  
Old 09-04-2017, 05:27 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,965
There are TWO Letters Patent that cover the HRH titles currently in force in the UK, along with a third issuing of The Queen's Will.

1. 1917 Letters Patent. This gives HRH to the children of the monarch, all male line grandchildren, the eldest son of the eldest son and the wives of the males who qualify. This means the following are HRHs:

a) children of the monarch - Charles, Anne, Andrew and Edward
b) male-line grandchildren of a monarch - - from Charles - William and Harry; from Andrew -
Beatrice and Eugenie, from Henry, 3rd son of George V - Richard - The Duke of Gloucester; from George -
4th son of George V - Edward - The Duke of Kent, Alexandra and Michael
c) eldest son of the eldest son of the monarch - George
d) spouses of the males listed above - Camilla, Sophie, Kate, Birgitte - The Duchess of Gloucester, Katherine - The Duchess of Kent and Marie-Christine (aka Princess Michael of Kent)

So why not Louise and James. In 1999 the Queen's Will was made known that the children of Edward and Sophie would be styled as the children of an Earl rather than HRH. I personally wrote to BP to confirm that that meant they were no longer HRHs and have had that confirmed by BP itself.

2. The other LPs are the 2012 LPs that the Queen issued to cover all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales - hence Charlotte and the new baby are/will be HRH Prince/Princess, whereas under the 1917 LPs only George would be HRH.

Given what happened in 1999 I don't expect that Harry's children will be HRH in the Queen's reign and she may even follow the 1999 announcement and let it be known that Harry's children will be styled as the children of a Duke/Earl or whatever title he is given with Charles and William agreeing with that idea. With a third child for the Cambridge's there is even less need for anymore HRHs in that generation given the antipathy to the 3rd and 4th HRHs in William and Harry's generation. Harry's children won't be called upon to do royal duties so being a Lord/Lady would be more beneficial than being HRH.

I suspect that the intention is to eventually limit the HRH to the children of the monarch and the heir to the throne but not to the younger children's children and with Charlotte not passing on HRH it would also make sense that any younger brothers don't have that right when they will be lower in the line of succession.

Andrew's children are HRHs because they are the children of a son of the monarch. Nothing needed to be done to have them so styled while for Anne separate LPs would have been needed to give them any title. Remember that the Queen was born the first child of the Duke of York - the same position as Beatrice.

It should be noted that in 1948 George VI had to issue LPs giving HRH to all the children of The Princess Elizabeth otherwise Charles would have been born Lord Charles Mountbatten, Earl of Merioneth and Anne born as Lady Anne Mountbatten. Even though Elizabeth was the heiress to the throne she was still only a girl and so, like her aunt Mary, sister Margaret and daughter Anne didn't have the automatic right to pass on HRH to her children.

Any earlier rules that applied before 1917 were ended with the LPs issued that year.
Reply With Quote
  #3128  
Old 09-04-2017, 07:22 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
There are very clear rules:
- Children and male-line grandchildren of the Sovereign are HRH with titular dignity of prince or princess
- The children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales are also princes and princesses (until recently the rule was that the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales was also a prince, but the Queen has extended this to all his children)

So, to clarify the current situation:
- Peter and Zara were never to be Royal Highnesses with the titular dignity of Prince and Princess; if their father had accepted a (noble) title, their titles would have derived from his titles.
- Beatrice and Eugenie are entitled to HRH and princess as male-line grandchildren of the Sovereign.
- Louise and James were entitled to HRH and prince(ss), however, the Queen decided otherwise and that is why they are now known als Lady Louise and Viscount Severn (as children of a normal earl)
- George would have been HRH prince George of Cambridge independent of the Queen's Letters Patent; Charlotte (and her future brother/sister) would have been Lady (or Lord) until their grandfather's (so Charles', not William's!) ascension to the throne had the queen not issues the Letters Patent.

Something you didn't ask, but might wonder: Harry's children won't be HRH and prince(ss) under the Queen's reign, the eldest son will take his father's secondary title and the others will be known als Lord and Lady Mountbatten-Windsor. According to the current rules, they will become HRH and prince(ss) when Charles ascends the throne (if he never does and William becomes King instead, Harry's children will never be entitled to HRH and prince(ss)); however, we've seen with the children of Edward and Sophie that this is not a given (the Sovereign can always decide otherwise), so we have to see how it all plays out.

Hope this clarifies; if not, feel free to ask further questions.

Moderators, could you please move the question above and my answer to the appropriate thread as this is about the British and not the Swedish royal family titles. Thanks!
Thanks for that answer. That clears up a lot.
Reply With Quote
  #3129  
Old 09-04-2017, 07:58 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by duchessrachel View Post
Thanks for that answer. That clears up a lot.
As per Iluvberties post, George would not have been automatically Prince/HRH because he would have been the great grandson of the Monarch. Hence the need for LPs 2012
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #3130  
Old 09-04-2017, 08:03 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
As per Iluvberties post, George would not have been automatically Prince/HRH because he would have been the great grandson of the Monarch. Hence the need for LPs 2012

Actually George would have been - but Charlotte and the new baby wouldn't have been.

George is the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales and was covered by George V LPs but younger siblings weren't going to be HRHs until Charles became King.

That left the scenario of a first born girl, being the future monarch under the Succession to the Crown Act, being born as Lady Charlotte Mountbatten-Windsor and then the younger brother being the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales who wouldn't be the monarch being HRH Prince George from birth.

Hence the 2012 LPs to give the HRH to all of William's children so regardless of gender of the first born child it would be royal from birth.
Reply With Quote
  #3131  
Old 09-04-2017, 08:05 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 4,020
Questions about British Styles and Titles

No, George would have been covered by the 1917 LP as the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. If George was a girl, then she would not be an HRH when born even though she would be a future monarch per the 1917 LP.

The first boy was the only with a HRH per the 1917 LP, any other kids were non HRHs. The other kids is what the Queen corrected with the new LP.
Reply With Quote
  #3132  
Old 09-15-2017, 07:19 AM
NoShades's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
The tradition in the UK is that males in the royal family are created royal dukes on their wedding day. I don't see the Queen deviating from this at all or give Harry any kind of a "lesser" title than his brother. It just doesn't work like that.

As been stated before Edward was a one off thing with it intended that Edward be created the Duke of Edinburgh after the Queen and the DoE pass on. Edward will just become a royal duke on a different occasion than his wedding day. A duke is actually the highest ranking of a peer in the UK. Its interesting to note too that a prince is not a peer in the UK but the title "prince(ss) is used to denote a close relative of a monarch.

When the Queen (or the monarch) creates a royal duke, it is not a courtesy title. The Prince of Wales is not a courtesy title nor is The Princess Royal a courtesy title. Courtesy titles are those that are used by a spouse or a child of a peer or a royal. They take their titles and styles from the peer. Prince Michael of Kent is not a peer with any other title than "prince". Marie Christine takes her title and style from her husband and is therefore known as Princess Michael of Kent as a courtesy. If Harry wasn't to get any peerage upon his marriage, then Meghan would be Princess Henry of Wales.

The ins and outs of titles in the UK is a fascinating subject.
Would it not have been possible for Edward to be made the Duke of Wessex after marriage, and then inherit his Father's title as well when the time comes? I'm not an expert on this so thanks in advance.
Reply With Quote
  #3133  
Old 09-15-2017, 07:25 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
When Charles becomes King, William will then be The Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge. He will still keep those titles should Charles create him The Prince of Wales. One doesn't replace titles but adds onto them. Charles is still very much The Duke of Cornwall which is why Camilla has her title of The Duchess of Cornwall to use. She is also very much The Princess of Wales but has chosen to be styled with Charles' older title.

If it is created a duke, looks like a duke and walks like a duke, it will most certainly be a duke forevermore. Sorry... just had to do it and wake up my funny bone.
Well, Cornwall does get replaced by Lancaster, eventually.
Reply With Quote
  #3134  
Old 09-15-2017, 07:25 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,452
I don't think there's been a double Dukedom granted since Queen Victoria gave the title of Duke of Clarence and Avondale to Prince Eddy, who died young, (George V's older brother) and that was a different case anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #3135  
Old 09-15-2017, 07:34 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 8,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
Well, Cornwall does get replaced by Lancaster, eventually.
Right. I should have said that titles accumulate until one becomes the monarch and then all previous titles revert to the crown. That is the reason why both the Queen and Philip will have to pass on before Charles can create Edward The Duke of Edinburgh. If the Philip predeceases the Queen, Charles inherits his father's title as the eldest son and heir.

With Harry its a lot simpler. He will most likely be created a duke when he marries and that's it for life.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #3136  
Old 09-15-2017, 08:04 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,452
? I suppose the short answer to NoShades original question would be 'No' I guess, as no younger son of the British monarch bears two dukedoms at the same time or one after the other, just the eldest, the heir to the throne, who has Cornwall and Rothesay (in Scotland.)
Reply With Quote
  #3137  
Old 09-15-2017, 08:10 AM
NoShades's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 37
Well, Wessex as an area/place doesn't exist today so I assume the title Earl & Countess of Wessex is a courtesy title. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, I am truly fascinated in knowing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
? I suppose the short answer to NoShades original question would be 'No' I guess, as no younger son of the British monarch bears two dukedoms at the same time or one after the other, just the eldest, the heir to the throne, who has Cornwall and Rothesay (in Scotland.)
Sorry, just seen this. I'm all over the place today

Anyway thanks for explaining.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhea6 View Post
But when Charles is King , William I think will be made Prince of wales ? Or he may forgo the title n remain Duke of Cambridge.

The point is that William anyway will have a higher title / placement in the firm as it is . So if Harry is made a duke on his wedding then he will remain one forever .
Hi, yes that's right - it's just from how I've studied the way the Queen confers titles on the Windsor males, it appeared to me she styles according to position of birth and in an orderly way. For example, the Prince of Wales, the Duke of York and so on. Yes, Charles has a couple of dukedoms, but first and foremost he is the Prince of Wales. And as it will likely be quite a while before there's a change of guard with regard to Charles' ascension to the throne, I'm not sure the Queen will feel it right that William and Harry along will their wives should hold the same rank & position at the same time. Especially in a very hierarchical system. I'm not sure I'm making any sense.
Reply With Quote
  #3138  
Old 09-15-2017, 08:34 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,452
Well yes it is a hierarchical system. I'm not sure that the titles are always 'in order' though. For instance, the title of Duke of York is traditionally the title given to the monarch's second son. Queen Victoria deviated from that, however, when her second son became Alfred Duke of Edinburgh.

It just happens to be that Charles has only two children, and as the elder, William, is second in line to the throne, then naturally he will move up to Duke of Cornwall, then Prince of Wales when Charles becomes king.

It is more noticeable I suppose when there are only two sons, but of course all Queen Victoria's three younger sons were Dukes and therefore of the same rank, and all King George V's younger sons were of the same rank as Dukes too, until Albert, the second son ascended the throne as George VI after the Abdication.
Reply With Quote
  #3139  
Old 09-15-2017, 08:39 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk/Budapest, Hungary
Posts: 5,575


Many thanks Curryong, that's exactly the information I was trying to work out myself.

So, we can expect all the sons of a monarch or grandsons of a monarch (who would of-course eventually become sons of a monarch themselves) to become Dukes upon marriage.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #3140  
Old 09-15-2017, 08:45 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacknch View Post


Many thanks Curryong, that's exactly the information I was trying to work out myself.

So, we can expect all the sons of a monarch or grandsons of a monarch (who would of-course eventually become sons of a monarch themselves) to become Dukes upon marriage.
Eventually in theory, maybe not always in reality. Even if Charles were to die tomorrow, and thus Harry will never be the son of a monarch, I'm still sure that The Queen would give Harry a Dukedom on his wedding day.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

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


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 4 (0 members and 4 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 1724 Today 10:26 AM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 50 06-02-2017 02:28 PM
Non-British Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 735 01-30-2017 01:39 PM
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 749 06-29-2016 06:02 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn King Willem-Alexander, Queen Máxima and family 67 05-24-2013 03:14 PM




Popular Tags
albania autographs baptism best gown september 2016 best outfit best outfit september 2016 birthday coel hen crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion current events december denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of cambridge cocktail dresses duchess of cambridge eveningwear far-right fashion poll king abdullah ii king philippe lists monaco monarchy morgan multiple births nazi nobel nobel gala november 2016 october 2016 paris picture of the week pieter van vollenhoven prince charles prince liam princess marie fashion princess marie style princess mary princess mary fashion princess sofia queen elizabeth ii queen frederika queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia cocktail dresses queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia eveningwear queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen mathildes hats queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania fashion rohan family state visit succession sweden swedish royal family the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats what ifs


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:50 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises