The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #3921  
Old 11-28-2018, 11:07 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Queen Anne's daughters weren't born as the children of a Queen though.

They were female line granddaughters of the King - like Princess Anne and Princess Margaret's children.

The rules were also different back then. The title of 'princess' wasn't given in the way it is today. George I's rules would be more familiar to us but even so they aren't the same as the ones used today.

George V's rules are the ones that apply in the UK today but he replaced ones initially set by Queen Victoria in 1898.

But they must have been princesses of Denmark from birth? As Prince George of Denmark and Norway kept his Royal title when he married and only got the title of Duke of Cumberland in addition. So during the reign of William and Mary, Anne was HRH Princess Anne of Denmark and Norway, Duchess of Cumberland?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3922  
Old 11-28-2018, 11:16 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
.
Then the Queen became pregnant with Andrew and a legal advisor told her that giving her children only her name made them effectively illegitimate as only the children of single mothers took their mothers names.
Surely this must be an exaggeration? Was Philip effectively illegitimate as well because he used his maternal grandfather's surname? I suspect someone may have pointed out the Queen's children were similar to illegitimate children who used their mother's surname & she rightly wanted them to bear her husband's surname like any other British child born within a legally valid marriage.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #3923  
Old 11-28-2018, 11:46 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawin View Post
Surely this must be an exaggeration? Was Philip effectively illegitimate as well because he used his maternal grandfather's surname? I suspect someone may have pointed out the Queen's children were similar to illegitimate children who used their mother's surname & she rightly wanted them to bear her husband's surname like any other British child born within a legally valid marriage.

I don't think an exaggeration...I myself heard this in a documentary I saw recently.



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #3924  
Old 11-29-2018, 12:30 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
But they must have been princesses of Denmark from birth? As Prince George of Denmark and Norway kept his Royal title when he married and only got the title of Duke of Cumberland in addition. So during the reign of William and Mary, Anne was HRH Princess Anne of Denmark and Norway, Duchess of Cumberland?

You ask an interesting question. George and Anne were referred to as the Prince and Princess of Denmark but it seems their children weren't.

Their son William Duke of Gloucester is called "Prince William" in the authoritative Complete Peerage.

https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/271 [see Gloucester in Vol. 5, p. 743].

But the 1949 edition of Burke's Peerage calls Anne's other son "Lord George" and her daughters "Lady Mary" [she had two daughters by that name] and "Lady Anne Sophia."

https://archive.org/stream/burkesgen.../n265/mode/2up

All five children are buried in Westminster Abbey and the burial register calls them "Lord/Lady" except for William who is called "HRH."

https://archive.org/details/marriage...goog/page/n234

See pp. 217 (Lady Mary & Lady Ann-Sophia), 226 (Lady Mary), 230 (Lord George), and 246 (HRH William).
Reply With Quote
  #3925  
Old 11-29-2018, 12:43 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
I don't think an exaggeration...I myself heard this in a documentary I saw recently.



LaRae
But using a mother's surname does NOT make a child illegitimate, even "effectively," which means "virtually, substantially; so far as the result is concerned" (Oxford English Dictionary). It's the legality of the parents' marriage that counts. The Queen's children may have been similar to illegitimate children but they weren't effectively illegitimate.
Reply With Quote
  #3926  
Old 11-29-2018, 01:38 AM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,732
What was said was that the only children who used their mother's name was illegitimate children not that the Queen's children was in any way illegitimate.
This was in fact not true even at the time since for instance the chieftains and heads of the clans and families of Scotland must carry that name leading, for instance, to that the eldest daughter of the Queen's relative Alexander Ramsay of Mar carries the name Fraser since she's set to inherit the headship of the family of Fraser of Philort from her mother, The Lady Saltoun.
Reply With Quote
  #3927  
Old 11-29-2018, 01:57 AM
CrownPrincessJava's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ,, Australia
Posts: 859
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
....she issued a new statement that the House name would remain Windsor but all of her descendants who needed to use a surname (other than the descendants of females whose children would take their father's names) would be Mountbatten-Windsor.

We see this used with Lady Louise who uses Windsor for short but whose official name, as evidenced in the CC on occasion and William's wedding programme is Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor. We also saw it when William and Kate too legal action in France where titles aren't permitted and they also used Mountbatten-Windsor.

Both Anne and Charles also used Mountbatten-Windsor on their first marriage certificates.

So the situation is that the House name is Windsor but the surname is Mountbatten-Windsor.
That is very interesting since the children of Princes Charles, William and Andrew used their Dukedom as surnames for their children. Prince George is known as George Cambridge at his school. Yet Lady Louise has always maintained Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, and not Louise Wessex.
Reply With Quote
  #3928  
Old 11-29-2018, 04:47 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
But they must have been princesses of Denmark from birth? As Prince George of Denmark and Norway kept his Royal title when he married and only got the title of Duke of Cumberland in addition. So during the reign of William and Mary, Anne was HRH Princess Anne of Denmark and Norway, Duchess of Cumberland?
I suppose that, technically, she held that title in Denmark and Norway and was indeed referred to as HRH Princess Anne of Denmark in Acts of the English Parliament such as The Bill of Rights . However, as the British posters here like to remind us, the UK now doesn’t recognize foreign titles and members of the British Royal Family who live in the United Kingdom, at least in more recent times, normally don’t use them.

Take Queen Alexandra for example. Being a princess by birth, one would imagine she would have been entitled to be called HRH Princess Alexandra, Princess of Wales upon marriage. However, that was not the case and she was referrred to in the UK simply as HRH The Princess of Wales.

Likewise, if Princess Madeleine of Sweden had married Prince William, she probably would not have been called HRH Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Cambridge, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland as it would be expected . In the UK, she would still be simply HRH The Duchess of Cambridge, just like the commoner Kate Middleton. At least, that is my interpretation of current British practice.

EDIT: I guess we wouldn’t have to speculate about William and Madeleine’s children being called Prince / Princess xxx of Cambridge and Sweden since they would not have been baptized in the Church of Sweden and, therefore, as I understand it, would not have been in the line of succession to the Swedish throne.
Reply With Quote
  #3929  
Old 11-29-2018, 05:22 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawin View Post
Surely this must be an exaggeration? Was Philip effectively illegitimate as well because he used his maternal grandfather's surname? I suspect someone may have pointed out the Queen's children were similar to illegitimate children who used their mother's surname & she rightly wanted them to bear her husband's surname like any other British child born within a legally valid marriage.
The person who initiated the discussion was Edward Iwi and he wrote, "When the new baby is born, as matters now stand it will bear the Badge of Bastardy namely, its mother's maiden name."

An article about the matter, https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/feb/18/monarchy .

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownPrincessJava View Post
That is very interesting since the children of Princes Charles, William and Andrew used their Dukedom as surnames for their children. Prince George is known as George Cambridge at his school. Yet Lady Louise has always maintained Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, and not Louise Wessex.
The declaration was that the Queen's non-HRH descendants carry the Mountbatten-Windsor surname, and Lady Louise is not styled HRH. A secondary reason may be that her father is expected to be the Duke of Edinburgh, so it is easier for her to have and keep the name Louise Mountbatten-Windsor.
Reply With Quote
  #3930  
Old 11-29-2018, 05:29 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,414
George, Charlotte and Louis are probably using Cambridge but that will change as when the Queen leaves her position and Charles becomes King they will be 'of Cornwall and Cambridge'. I doubt they will add Cornwall at school but William will also probably be created Prince of Wales so then they will drop the 'of Cornwall and Cambridge' and become 'of Wales' so will they change their names every time or simply keep using 'Cambridge' until William stops being the Duke of Cambridge when he becomes King - or when they are given their own titles?

The difference with Louise is that she isn't a Princess nor a substantive title holder so it would be incorrect for her to use 'Wessex'. That is reserved for Edward himself and then James but not his daughters who use their surnames.

Lady Louise isn't 'of Wessex' now and won't be 'of Edinburgh' if that eventuates. She is simply Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor.

James is the same - Lord James Mountbatten-Windsor, Viscount Severn. He isn't The Viscount Severn. His father is.
Reply With Quote
  #3931  
Old 11-29-2018, 05:32 AM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
So during the reign of William and Mary, Anne was HRH Princess Anne of Denmark and Norway, Duchess of Cumberland?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I suppose that, technically, she held that title in Denmark and Norway and was indeed referred to as HRH Princess Anne of Denmark in Acts of the English Parliament such as The Bill of Rights . However, as the British posters here like to remind us, the UK now doesn’t recognize foreign titles and members of the British Royal Family who live in the United Kingdom, at least in more recent times, normally don’t use them.
Given that Queen Anne was mentioned as The Princess Anne of Denmark in several sources, such as The London Gazette on 19th July 1688, we should assume that this was the title she was formally known as. Before her marriage she was known as HH The Lady Anne.
Many of the customs regarding British royal titles didn't start to come in place until the Hannoverians ascended the throne and brought their German customs with them.
Reply With Quote
  #3932  
Old 11-29-2018, 08:37 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
The person who initiated the discussion was Edward Iwi and he wrote, "When the new baby is born, as matters now stand it will bear the Badge of Bastardy namely, its mother's maiden name."

An article about the matter, https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/feb/18/monarchy .
Thank you. I was responding to another post which stated "Then the Queen became pregnant with Andrew and a legal advisor told her that giving her children only her name made them effectively illegitimate as only the children of single mothers took their mothers names."

No legal advisor would be stupid enough to say using a mother's surname makes a child "effectively illegitimate." The article you linked too confirms this - the Queen's children were compared to illegitimate children but no one stated they were effectively illegitimate, which is a completely different matter.
Reply With Quote
  #3933  
Old 11-29-2018, 08:39 AM
loonytick's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Tennessee, United States
Posts: 755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
The difference with Louise is that she isn't a Princess nor a substantive title holder so it would be incorrect for her to use 'Wessex'. That is reserved for Edward himself and then James but not his daughters who use their surnames.

Lady Louise isn't 'of Wessex' now and won't be 'of Edinburgh' if that eventuates. She is simply Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor.

James is the same - Lord James Mountbatten-Windsor, Viscount Severn. He isn't The Viscount Severn. His father is.
So, if no letters patent are issued for Harry’s child and the baby is born without an HRH, should we expect the child to be styled Lord/Lady (first name) Mountbatten-Windsor, not (first name) Sussex?
Reply With Quote
  #3934  
Old 11-29-2018, 08:46 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,183
I believe that they would sign their names like Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor does. She goes by Louise Windsor at school. Perhaps after Charles becomes King and nothing is changed and the Sussex kids are HRH, then they would use Sussex like Harry and William used Wales. I believe George goes by George Cambridge at school.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #3935  
Old 11-29-2018, 09:16 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawin View Post
You ask an interesting question. George and Anne were referred to as the Prince and Princess of Denmark but it seems their children weren't.

Their son William Duke of Gloucester is called "Prince William" in the authoritative Complete Peerage.

https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/271 [see Gloucester in Vol. 5, p. 743].

But the 1949 edition of Burke's Peerage calls Anne's other son "Lord George" and her daughters "Lady Mary" [she had two daughters by that name] and "Lady Anne Sophia."

https://archive.org/stream/burkesgen.../n265/mode/2up

All five children are buried in Westminster Abbey and the burial register calls them "Lord/Lady" except for William who is called "HRH."

https://archive.org/details/marriage...goog/page/n234

See pp. 217 (Lady Mary & Lady Ann-Sophia), 226 (Lady Mary), 230 (Lord George), and 246 (HRH William).
I just discovered Francois Velde discussed the titles of Queen Anne's children on his Heraldica website:

https://www.heraldica.org/topics/bri...hness.htm#Anne

He also discusses foreign titles but only as they relate to British subjects, not members of the Royal Family. For example, he doesn't include the fact that the Hanoverian Kings were also Electors of Hanover, a foreign title:

https://www.heraldica.org/topics/bri...eigntitles.htm
Reply With Quote
  #3936  
Old 11-29-2018, 09:38 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I believe that they would sign their names like Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor does. She goes by Louise Windsor at school. Perhaps after Charles becomes King and nothing is changed and the Sussex kids are HRH, then they would use Sussex like Harry and William used Wales. I believe George goes by George Cambridge at school.

It is not really that complicated. Children of a duke who do not hold a title use their name and family name like everybody else, with the only difference being that they are entitled to also use the honorific Lord/Lady before their names. So Louise will always be (Lady) Louise Mountbatten-Windsor until she gets married and takes her husband's name.


A non-royal who holds a title in the peerage also has a legal name and family name, but its is customary in the UK to be known instead by his title. For example, Robert Crawley, Earl of Grantham, is formally addressed as Lord Grantham and would probably go by Grantham at school too. That is also true BTW for the heir to a peerage who holds a courtesy title. For example, Viscount Linley, formally addressed as Lord Linley, could also go by Linley at school, or among his friends.



Princes of the United Kingdom (i.e. HRHs) are in a different category as they don't normally use a family name although , whenever they have to use one, the HRHs who are descendants in male line of QEII and Prince Philip use Mountbatten-Windsor as their legal surname. Princes and princesses who are children of royal dukes follow, I suppose, the custom in the peerage and are known at school by the territorial designation of their fathers' title. That was also the case back in Victorian times when Queen Victoria for example mentioned her cousins as e.g. "George Cambridge" .
Reply With Quote
  #3937  
Old 11-29-2018, 09:48 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by loonytick View Post
So, if no letters patent are issued for Harry’s child and the baby is born without an HRH, should we expect the child to be styled Lord/Lady (first name) Mountbatten-Windsor, not (first name) Sussex?
Unless Meghan/Harry say otherwise when Charles is King, The Sussexes children will be elevated to HRH. So the titles could change after X years.



LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #3938  
Old 11-29-2018, 10:09 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
Given that Queen Anne was mentioned as The Princess Anne of Denmark in several sources, such as The London Gazette on 19th July 1688, we should assume that this was the title she was formally known as. Before her marriage she was known as HH The Lady Anne.
Many of the customs regarding British royal titles didn't start to come in place until the Hannoverians ascended the throne and brought their German customs with them.



Yes, as I had said before, the English Bill of Rights of 1689 refers to Anne as "HRH Princess Anne of Denmark" and to her sister Mary as " Princess of Orange".



My point was that, in more recent times, foreign princesses who married into the BRF didn't use their foreign titles in the UK. The last example was Princess Marina of Greece and Denmark, who became only HRH The Duchess of Kent in the UK. After her son got married, the Queen allowed her to be known as HRH Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent, but, as far as I understand, that was not a (late) recognition of her status as a princess by birth, but rather it was simply done to distinguish her from her daughter-in-law.
Reply With Quote
  #3939  
Old 11-29-2018, 04:27 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
Unless Meghan/Harry say otherwise when Charles is King, The Sussexes children will be elevated to HRH. So the titles could change after X years.



LaRae

It doesn't have to be Harry or Meghan saying anything - it could be Charles himself issuing new LPs or making a statement - The King's Will being made known with or without their support.

That is how Louise and James were stripped of their right to HRH - The Queen's Will being made known.

The support of the adults involved would be nice but isn't necessary.

If Charles is serious about reducing the size of the BRF then he has to start with his own descendants and he will have four grandchildren by this time next year and probably end up with another one or two.

The Queen has four HRH grandchildren - which allegedly Charles sees as too many and unnecessary so he has to start with his own family or be seen as a hypocrite.

Although there is no actual comment on record from Charles of a smaller royal family, only a comment from a staffer that such a suggestion was made at the first Way Ahead Group meeting in 1992, it has never been confirmed.

Some people point to the balcony at the 2012 Jubilee but that was simply a recreation of the Jubilee balcony after Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee with only The Queen and the Wales branch of the family on the balcony - nothing suggested then about reducing the size of the BRF.

I do think that Harry may very well follow the example of his Uncle Edward. He has seen had hard things are in many ways for his HRH cousins and he knows that his children will be in the same position in time - the irrelevant to the future of the BRF children of the second son. That doesn't mean that the girls aren't much loved but just that their role is to work normally and not attend royal events. His children will be the same.
Reply With Quote
  #3940  
Old 11-29-2018, 04:35 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by loonytick View Post
So, if no letters patent are issued for Harry’s child and the baby is born without an HRH, should we expect the child to be styled Lord/Lady (first name) Mountbatten-Windsor, not (first name) Sussex?
Absolutely.

If no special LPs are issued - and we are approaching the two month mark since the announcement of the pregnancy and the Queen issued the new LPs for William's children at the three week mark after the announcement of Kate's pregnancy - then they will be styled as the children of a Duke.

A daughter would be Lady xxxx Mountbatten-Windsor.

The eldest son would be Earl Dumbarton. Younger sons would be Lord yyyy Mountbatten-Windsor.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, consort, duke of york, kate, princess beatrice, queenmother, spouse, styles and titles, titles uk styles


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
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 894 11-27-2019 12:04 AM
Non-British Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 782 10-28-2019 08:29 AM
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1897 11-29-2017 04:13 AM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 50 06-02-2017 03:28 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn King Willem-Alexander, Queen Máxima and family 67 05-24-2013 04:14 PM




Popular Tags
administrator archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy bangladesh belgian royal belgian royal family crown prince hussein's future wife crusades current events cypher danish royalty denmark duchess of cambridge duchess of sussex duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of sussex dutch royal family family search felipe vi french royalty friendly city future future wife of prince hussein general news germany greece hamdan bin mohammed headship hill house of bernadotte jerusalem king salman lithuania lithuanian palaces meghan markle memoir mohammed vi monaco royal monarchism monarchy mountbatten netflix nobel prize norway history official visit pakistan prince charles prince daniel prince harry princely family of monaco princess benedikte princess margaret qe2 queen mathilde queen paola rown royal children royal tour russian imperial family saudi arabia savoy saxony south africa state visit state visit to denmark sweden swedish history trump valois visit from sweden


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:09 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises
×