Questions about British Styles and Titles

[Pranter]

The grandchildren who have been 'stripped' were done so at the request of the parents.

By the time William is King the working royals will be even less than there are now...he doesn't have 3 siblings and working cousins. There may be a need for Harry's children to be there supporting William/George at least for some time.


LaRae

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by RoyalHighness 2002

It really wouldn't make sense for the Queen's collateral great-grandchild to have a princely style and title while her collateral grandchildren have been 'stripped' of theirs and use noble titles and styles. This would totally contradict Charles proposed wish to streamline the RF and would probably lead to a lot of criticism.

It's also worth keeping in mind that the Wessexes never intended to be full time royals when that announcement was made.

[RoyalHighness 2002]

Originally Posted by Pranter

The grandchildren who have been 'stripped' were done so at the request of the parents.

By the time William is King the working royals will be even less than there are now...he doesn't have 3 siblings and working cousins. There may be a need for Harry's children to be there supporting William/George at least for some time.


LaRae

Well if that's really a problem then it can be easily solved. If they were thinking of the future and needed more working royals than they could easily led Beatrice onto that path and once the Wessexes became working royals it could have been made known that Louise was going to be a working royal too. The same scenario is happening if the Sussex kid/s become Firm member and Louise will always have precedence over any Sussex kids even if they are HRH anyways.

[Zonk]

It will be quite interesting for us royal watchers to see if how the title of Baby Sussex is handled, so far we have:

1) Queen issues NO new patents...and Baby Sussex is either an Earl or Lady. Any and all future Sussex children are titled as the son and/or daughter of a Duke.

2) Queen issues Patents, and the Baby Sussex is born an HRH, Prince/Princess of Sussex.

3) Queen issues no new patents, and Baby Sussex are titled the son and/or daughter of a Duke. Upon the accession of Charles, they become HRH's, Prince and/or Princess of Sussex.

4) Queen issues No new Patents, and Baby Sussex are titled the son and/or daughter of a Duke. Upon the accession of Charles, they become HRH's, Prince and/or Princess of Sussex but like the Wessex Children, they remain known by their lesser titles.

-----------

I can actually see #3 or 4 happening...Baby Sussex will be the grandchildren of a King, niece/nephew of a King as well as first cousins of a King. Option #3 gives them the option of becoming working royals if needed. Letting #4 happen, gives the Sussex kids the opportunity to be like a Zara or a Louise. Part of the royal family but not part of the working royal family.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

Neither.

'Your Grace' is the style for a Duke, Duchess or a Bishop not anyone else.

'Your Royal Highness' is for someone who is an HRH

All other peers and their wives - such as Marquises, Marchionesses, Earls, Countesses, Viscounts and Viscountesses are - My Lord/Lady

If you watch Downton Abbey the Earl is always called 'My Lord' or 'His Lordship'.

David Armstrong-Jones, 2nd Earl Snowdon would be referred to as 'My Lord' and both is wife and sister as 'My Lady' even though they are grandchildren of a King.

The Duke of Gloucester would be 'Your Royal Highness' or 'His Royal Highness' but his son will be 'Your Grace' or 'His Grace' as he won't be an HRH.

British marquesses officially are The Most Honourable and British earls, viscounts, and barons The Right Honourable. See examples:

https://www.parliament.uk/biographie...of-lothian/259
https://www.parliament.uk/biographie...earl-peel/3161

However, those predicates do not apply to courtesy peers such as Viscount Severn.

Originally Posted by RoyalHighness 2002

It really wouldn't make sense for the Queen's collateral great-grandchild to have a princely style and title while her collateral grandchildren have been 'stripped' of theirs and use noble titles and styles. [...]

While her intentions may or may not have changed in the 19 years since, I cannot imagine that the Queen's intention in 1999 was to deny the Wessex children the titles used by every other male-line grandchild before and after them since the 19th century, rather than to set a precedent for the future children of younger sons of monarchs.

Originally Posted by Pranter

The grandchildren who have been 'stripped' were done so at the request of the parents.

As far as I have heard, it was never stated by the royal family that the Wessex couple requested for their children not to be HRH, despite the rumor. The announcement in 1999 read "the Queen has also decided, with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones."

Title of HRH The Prince Edward

The Queen has today been pleased to confer an Earldom on The Prince Edward. His titles will be Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn. The Prince Edward thus becomes His Royal Highness The Earl of Wessex and Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones on marriage will become Her Royal Highness The Countess of Wessex.

The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales have also agreed that The Prince Edward should be given the Dukedom of Edinburgh in due course, when the present title now held by Prince Philip eventually reverts to the Crown.

The Queen has also decided, with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones, that any children they might have should not be given the style His or Her Royal Highness, but would have courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by RoyalHighness 2002

Well if that's really a problem then it can be easily solved. If they were thinking of the future and needed more working royals than they could easily led Beatrice onto that path and once the Wessexes became working royals it could have been made known that Louise was going to be a working royal too. The same scenario is happening if the Sussex kid/s become Firm member and Louise will always have precedence over any Sussex kids even if they are HRH anyways.

By the point the older working royals start scaling back or retire entirely, Beatrice will be almost 50, I doubt that's the point they'll start her on royal duties. And no, Louise will not have precedence over Sussex kids under Charles' reign and going forward. They'll likely always consider the grand kids of a monarch over nieces and nephew of a monarch and nieces or nephews over cousins of a monarch. Keep in mind, none of us are talking about not having enough royals in the immediate future, but 20-30 years from now when the Kents and Gloucesters all have to retired and Anne will be in her late 80s or 90s while Charles only having two sons rather than 4 kids like his mother.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Pranter

By the time William is King the working royals will be even less than there are now...he doesn't have 3 siblings and working cousins. There may be a need for Harry's children to be there supporting William/George at least for some time.

Originally Posted by RoyalHighness 2002

Well if that's really a problem then it can be easily solved. If they were thinking of the future and needed more working royals than they could easily led Beatrice onto that path and once the Wessexes became working royals it could have been made known that Louise was going to be a working royal too. The same scenario is happening if the Sussex kid/s become Firm member and Louise will always have precedence over any Sussex kids even if they are HRH anyways.

Originally Posted by jacqui24

By the point the older working royals start scaling back or retire entirely, Beatrice will be almost 50, I doubt that's the point they'll start her on royal duties.

If I understood the point RoyalHighness 2002 was making, it was that if the royal family believed more working royals would be needed after the older working royals scaled back or retired, then Princess Beatrice would naturally have been started on royal duties earlier.

[kathl29]

What seems to be forgotten is that everyone wanted the York girls to be princesses when they were born as well. Now as they are much further down the line of succession people think they should be stripped of their titles. If Harry and Meghan’s children are given titles they will face the same pressures in 25 years time when they are no longer cute babies and children and move down the line of succession as Williams kids start to marry and have children of their own.

Adults without a formal royal role are not looked on as favourably by tax payers as children are - at some point Harrys kids will go on holidays and to nightclubs like all young adults do and get the same negative press coverage the York girls get - the British media are notorious for making one royal out to be the good one (Elizabeth, Charles, William) and then their sibling to be the wilder one (Margaret, Andrew, Harry). Do we really want to put another set of royal kids through the same constant negative media the York girls have been through?

[alvinking]

Here is a scenario well actually a scenario that crossed my mind.
It is totally hypothetical.
If Harry wasn't given a Dukedom at his wedding
He would have been HRH Prince Henry of Wales
and Meghan would have been HRH Princess Henry of Wales
1-- In this case how would their children by styled as great grandchildren of the monarch assuming my LPs are issued to bestow onto them the dignity HRH
I supposed it would be Mr. [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor, and Ms. [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor
Case 2 LPs makes them HRHs/Princes
The children would then be HRH Prince or Princess [First Name] but of what. Surely it could not be of Wales, since PoW would be their Grandfather and not their father.
HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor?? or HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] of Prince Henry of Wales??
Case 3 Charles ascends to the Throne, and Prince Harry becomes HRH The Prince Henry, and Meghan becomes HRH The Princess Henry. In the case how would the children be styled HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor??? or HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] of The Prince Henry???

[Ish]

Originally Posted by alvinking

Here is a scenario well actually a scenario that crossed my mind.
It is totally hypothetical.
If Harry wasn't given a Dukedom at his wedding
He would have been HRH Prince Henry of Wales
and Meghan would have been HRH Princess Henry of Wales
1-- In this case how would their children by styled as great grandchildren of the monarch assuming my LPs are issued to bestow onto them the dignity HRH
I supposed it would be Mr. [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor, and Ms. [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor

If Harry was not made a Duke, his children would have been Lord/Lady [Name] Mountbatten Windsor. See Prince Michael’s children for example.

Case 2 LPs makes them HRHs/Princes
The children would then be HRH Prince or Princess [First Name] but of what. Surely it could not be of Wales, since PoW would be their Grandfather and not their father.
HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor?? or HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] of Prince Henry of Wales??

If Harry hadn’t been given a title, but his children were created HRHs by new LPs, they would have been HRH Prince/Princess [Name] with no territorial designation (technically the designation would be “of the United Kingdom”, but that gets dropped).

Case 3 Charles ascends to the Throne, and Prince Harry becomes HRH The Prince Henry, and Meghan becomes HRH The Princess Henry. In the case how would the children be styled HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor??? or HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] of The Prince Henry???

Again, if Harry hadn’t been given a peerage but his children were made HRHs, they would be HRH Prince/Princess [Name] with no territorial designation.

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by alvinking

Here is a scenario well actually a scenario that crossed my mind.
It is totally hypothetical.
If Harry wasn't given a Dukedom at his wedding
He would have been HRH Prince Henry of Wales
and Meghan would have been HRH Princess Henry of Wales
1-- In this case how would their children by styled as great grandchildren of the monarch assuming my LPs are issued to bestow onto them the dignity HRH
I supposed it would be Mr. [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor, and Ms. [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor
Case 2 LPs makes them HRHs/Princes
The children would then be HRH Prince or Princess [First Name] but of what. Surely it could not be of Wales, since PoW would be their Grandfather and not their father.
HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor?? or HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] of Prince Henry of Wales??
Case 3 Charles ascends to the Throne, and Prince Harry becomes HRH The Prince Henry, and Meghan becomes HRH The Princess Henry. In the case how would the children be styled HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] Mountbatten-Windsor??? or HRH Prince /Princess [First Name] of The Prince Henry???

We have a perfect example to look at in the living family, Prince Michael. If no LP was issued, Harrys kids woukd be treated the same. The kids would be Lord or Lady Mountbatten Windsor. The hyphenated name is used by any descendents who don't have Hrh.

When Charles becomes king would be another matter. There have never been male line grandchildren of a monarch whose parent didn't have a peerage. Make children of the monarch Always get a peerage if some kind. There was no chance really that Harry wouldn't.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

If I understood the point RoyalHighness 2002 was making, it was that if the royal family believed more working royals would be needed after the older working royals scaled back or retired, then Princess Beatrice would naturally have been started on royal duties earlier.

But there is quite a bit of working royals right now, and I do think that's where polling comes in as well. There is a lack of appetite for the public right now to support any of the Queen's other grandchild, and Andrew himself polls low. That certainly wouldn't extend any favorability to his daughter. It's also a timing thing. However, the story can be different when there is a shortage of royals to take on all the issues. Times change and unfortunately for Beatrice, it's not in her favor right now. Not a guarantee, but I can see how things would change in 25 years when the kids are older.

I still think the kids won't take HRH, but moreso by request of the parents than anything else.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Marlo

Their children not being prince/princess will send out the wrong message. IMO

What would be the wrong message? Imo it would send the wrong message if LPs are issued to make great grandchildren HRH prince(ss) while her grandchildren who were entitled to that style never received it.

Originally Posted by Pranter

The grandchildren who have been 'stripped' were done so at the request of the parents.

By the time William is King the working royals will be even less than there are now...he doesn't have 3 siblings and working cousins. There may be a need for Harry's children to be there supporting William/George at least for some time.


LaRae

Why? William has uncles and aunts and George already has 2 siblings.

So, if there would be a shortage at some point it would be before George and his siblings are up for royal duties but Harry's child(ren) wouldn't be able to eleviate that drop in numbers as s/he/they is/are even younger.

Originally Posted by RoyalHighness 2002

Well if that's really a problem then it can be easily solved. If they were thinking of the future and needed more working royals than they could easily led Beatrice onto that path and once the Wessexes became working royals it could have been made known that Louise was going to be a working royal too. The same scenario is happening if the Sussex kid/s become Firm member and Louise will always have precedence over any Sussex kids even if they are HRH anyways.

Louise has precedence over a Sussex child as long as the queen lives. As soon as Charles is king his grandchildren have precedence over his nieces and nephews.

[alvinking]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Louise has precedence over a Sussex child as long as the queen lives. As soon as Charles is king his grandchildren have precedence over his nieces and nephews.

I don't think so, when this child is 7th, and Louise will be 13th, and the precedence pretty much mirror the line of succession

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by alvinking

I don't think so, when this child is 7th, and Louise will be 13th, and the precedence pretty much mirror the line of succession

It doesn't. Relationship to the monarch is more important than place in line of succession (for example the princess Royal has a higher precedence than her 3 nieces although she is lower in line). However, best to discuss these issues in the precedence topic.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Why? William has uncles and aunts and George already has 2 siblings.

So, if there would be a shortage at some point it would be before George and his siblings are up for royal duties but Harry's child(ren) wouldn't be able to eleviate that drop in numbers as s/he/they is/are even younger.

Do you realize how old they are now and how old, if alive, they would be when William is King?

William is going to rely on his brother and his children (William's) and possible need Harry's to fill in as well.

LaRae

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Somebody

What would be the wrong message? Imo it would send the wrong message if LPs are issued to make great grandchildren HRH prince(ss) while her grandchildren who were entitled to that style never received it.

I am not sure about messages but HMQ didn't deny the Wessex children anything. They would have been HRH but their parents wanted otherwise. Also Edward and Sophie were not going to be working royals which was a big part of that decision. Of course things changed.

As for Harry and Meghan? They will be HRH once Charles is is King, so they might feel giving them it from birth is the better opition. Or not. Harry and Meghan might forgo the titles all together.

It will be interesting to see what happens. Wasn't it announced within the month of Kate's pregnancy with George that the letters had been changed? So if they following the same pattern then we will likely learn one way or another soon.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Pranter

Do you realize how old they are now and how old, if alive, they would be when William is King?

William is going to rely on his brother and his children (William's) and possible need Harry's to fill in as well.

LaRae

Yes, I do. Andrew is 12 years younger than Charles and Edward 16 years younger, so they have many years ahead of them. By the time they need to be replaced we've the three Cambridges possibly with spouses. So, that would be 10 people (if Charlotte's spouse joins the fold) even if the whole previous generation isn't doing anything. That seems more than enough. No need to add 2 or 4 or 6 Sussexes (including spouses) to the mix.

Originally Posted by ACO

I am not sure about messages but HMQ didn't deny the Wessex children anything. They would have been HRH but their parents wanted otherwise. Also Edward and Sophie were not going to be working royals which was a big part of that decision. Of course things changed.

As for Harry and Meghan? They will be HRH once Charles is is King, so they might feel giving them it from birth is the better opition. Or not. Harry and Meghan might forgo the titles all together.

It will be interesting to see what happens. Wasn't it announced within the month of Kate's pregnancy with George that the letters had been changed? So if they following the same pattern then we will likely learn one way or another soon.

As has been pointed out we don't know whether Edward and Sophie didn't want HRH for their children. The queen decided it and they agreed. Whether it was their wish or the queen's idea that they succumbed to we don't know.

And I am sure the queen was smart enough to consider the precedent she was setting.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Yes, I do. Andrew is 12 years younger than Charles and Edward 16 years younger, so they have many years ahead of them. By the time they need to be replaced we've the three Cambridges possibly with spouses. So, that would be 10 people (if Charlotte's spouse joins the fold) even if the whole previous generation isn't doing anything. That seems more than enough. No need to add 2 or 4 or 6 Sussexes (including spouses) to the mix.

In 25 years (if Charles is as long lived as the Queen and The DoE we can guess he will be well into his 90's at least.)

Andrew will be 83
Anne will be 93
Edward will be 79

Yeah no...even if still working it's not likely they will be going at it full time as they are now. Physically or even mentally there comes a point where you can't.

William is going to rely on the younger royals.. none of his cousins are working royals.

LaRae

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Pranter

In 25 years (if Charles is as long lived as the Queen and The DoE we can guess he will be well into his 90's at least.)

Andrew will be 83
Anne will be 93
Edward will be 79

Yeah no...even if still working it's not likely they will be going at it full time as they are now. Physically or even mentally there comes a point where you can't.

William is going to rely on the younger royals.. none of his cousins are working royals.

LaRae

That's why I pointed out that if there would be an issue it would be before William's children become working members of the Firm. In this scenqrio i would guess they will be xalled upon at an earlier age than William and Harry. Enlisting the help of Harry's children is still pointless as they are younger. So, if this is the concern, it would argue for Beatrice and Eugenie to get involved. Not for Harry's children to be involved.