Questions about British Styles and Titles 1: Ending 2022

[Iluvbertie]

Quoting myself because I wasn't clear before...why is a king's spouse referred to as Her Majesty (similar to the king being His Majesty), but a queen regnant's spouse is referred to as His Royal Highness, when she's referred to as Her Majesty?

There is a hierarchy of ranks:

1. King
2. Queen
3. Prince
4. Princess

So a King will always outrank a Queen.

A Queen can thus be either the wife of the King or the reigning monarch.

As a reigning Queen can't have anyone who ranks higher than her, her husband can only be a Prince.

Only Kings and Queens can be 'His/Her Majesty'.

Princes and Princesses are His/Her Royal Highness (or His/Her Serene Highness e.g. Monaco or simply His/Her Highness the children of the Queen of Denmark's younger son are HH).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

In English, Princess is clearly the feminine form of Prince, in the same manner as waitress is the feminine form of waiter.

The English words King and Queen technically have different etymologies, but for centuries, Queen has been regarded as the feminine form of King in the English language.

One proof is that in English common law, a wife is entitled to her husband's rank and to use the feminine form of his title (if any), and morganatic marriage does not legally exist, except for women who marry men of lower rank or same-sex married couples. That the wife of a British King is Queen under common law indicates that the latter is not regarded as a lower-ranking, morganatic title.

In many other European languages, the word that is translated into English as Queen is the same as the word that is translated as King, but in feminine form, for example Koning and Koningin in Dutch.


Men who bear the masculine form of a title do not automatically outrank women who bear the feminine form of the same title in the British royal family, or in other European royal families. Anne, the Princess Royal, is outranked by the Princes who precede her in the order of succession to the crown, but she outranks the Princes who follow her in the order of succession.

https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/annex_d_-_royal_family_11.pdf

I am quite certain that even if, hypothetically, Queen Elizabeth II's husband had been King as her consort, the Queen (who as the Sovereign is the authority over the order of precedence) would never have assigned him a higher rank or precedence than herself. That may have been conceivable in 1552, but it would have been out of the question in 1952.

Consorts of Queens are HRH Prince xxxx

The consort of Queen Elizabeth II was HRH The Duke of Edinburgh since his marriage. The consort of Queen Victoria was initially HRH Prince Albert but subsequently became HRH The Prince Consort.

The main difference (everywhere) seems to be that only a queen consort or a queen regnant can be HM The Queen. Queens dowager or queens emerita (following the abdication of their husbands) are always HM Queen [forename].

It is interesting that monarchies which have adopted the custom of calling princesses consort by their husbands' given names (e.g., Princess Michael of Kent) have retained the older practice of using the wife's own given name for queens consort.

 

[Somebody]

(...)

Men who bear the masculine form of a title do not automatically outrank women who bear the feminine form of the same title in the British royal family, or in other European royal families. Anne, the Princess Royal, is outranked by the Princes who precede her in the order of succession to the crown, but she outranks the Princes who follow her in the order of succession.

https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/annex_d_-_royal_family_11.pdf (...)

As far as I am aware, precedence is not based on the order of succession but on the relationship to the queen. In practice, an exception is made for the Duke of Cambridge as the future king (and at least previously also for the Duke of Sussex as son of the future king) but for example Anne, as child of the monarch, would be given higher precedence than a HRH prince James, as a grandchild of the monarch, who is ahead of her in the line of succession (with a different title) - nor are Beatrice and Eugenie awarded higher precedence than their aunt.

 

[An Ard Ri]

Titles of the husbands of the English and later British Queen Regnants

Mary I (1516-1558)
Spouse : Philip of Spain m 1554
Title : King of England and Ireland

Mary II (1662-1694)
Spouse : William of Orange
Title : King of England,Scotland and Ireland

Queen Anne ,Queen of Great Britain and Ireland (1665-1714)
Spouse : George of Denmark
Title : Prince George ,Duke of Cumberland

Queen Victoria (1818-1902)
Spouse : Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
Title : HRH Prince Albert 1840-1857
HRH The Prince Consort 1857-1861

Elizabeth II (1926-
Spouse ; Philip of Greece and Denmark
Title 1947-1957 : His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh
1957-2021 : His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Although Queen Anne's husband was given a dukedom he continued to be referred to as the Prince of Denmark and Prince George of Denmark for the rest of his life.

Queen Elizabeth II's husband was referred to formally as The Duke of Edinburgh although Prince Philip was widely used by the public.

As far as I am aware, precedence is not based on the order of succession but on the relationship to the queen. In practice, an exception is made for the Duke of Cambridge as the future king (and at least previously also for the Duke of Sussex as son of the future king) but for example Anne, as child of the monarch, would be given higher precedence than a HRH prince James, as a grandchild of the monarch, who is ahead of her in the line of succession (with a different title) - nor are Beatrice and Eugenie awarded higher precedence than their aunt.

See here for a reply: https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/order-of-precedence-6536-61.html#post2450125

 

[Mbruno]

Queen consort is the correct title, Queen Elizabeth the queen mother was a queen consort. We do not use the consort part of the title in everyday use but it is the correct title, Catherine will be Queen Consort.
As there has never been a referendum on how the people feel about Camilla I am not sure how we can make blanket statements that this will not be accepted by the public.

There hasn't been a referendum, but there have been countless polls showing that the majority of the public opposes Camilla being called Queen.

In any case, if we want to go strictly by the common law, disregarding public opinion, the wife of HM The King is HM The Queen, not HM The Queen Consort, which is a title that does not legally exist and will have to be created, I guess, by separate Letters Patent.

 

[Hallo girl]

There hasn't been a referendum, but there have been countless polls showing that the majority of the public opposes Camilla being called Queen.

In any case, if we want to go strictly by the common law, disregarding public opinion, the wife of HM The King is HM The Queen, not HM The Queen Consort, which is a title that does not legally exist and will have to be created, I guess, by separate Letters Patent.

I am not getting into a debate , you have moved my post, lets agree to disagree, It would be a strange world if we all agreed on everything.

 

[Nico]

There hasn't been a referendum, but there have been countless polls showing that the majority of the public opposes Camilla being called Queen.

In any case, if we want to go strictly by the common law, disregarding public opinion, the wife of HM The King is HM The Queen, not HM The Queen Consort, which is a title that does not legally exist and will have to be created, I guess, by separate Letters Patent.

Again, you're wrong as the title "Queen consort" does exist ...

 

[Iluvbertie]

The title is Queen Consort just as The Queen's current title is Queen Regnant but the terms 'consort' and 'regnant' aren't used and are understood.

Camilla will be HM The Queen, if the wishes of HM The Queen as stated today, are followed.

 

[Hallo girl]

The title is Queen Consort just as The Queen's current title is Queen Regnant but the terms 'consort' and 'regnant' aren't used and are understood.

Camilla will be HM The Queen, if the wishes of HM The Queen as stated today, are followed.

She will be Queen Consort whether that title is used or not just as she is the Princess of Wales at the moment but has chosen not to use that title,

 

[Mbruno]

Again, you're wrong as the title "Queen consort" does exist ...

It exists an adjective in the English language. It doesn't exist as a title in English law.

The wife of he His Grace The Duke of Norfolk is Her Grace The Duchess of Norfolk, not Her Grace The Duchess Consort of Norfolk or Her Grace the Duchess of Norfolk Consort.

Again, in the same way, the wife of HM The King is simply HM The Queen, not HM The Queen Consort. The latter would be, in my opinion, equivalent to giving Camilla a title in her own right.

 

[Iluvbertie]

She will be Queen Consort whether that title is used or not just as she is the Princess of Wales at the moment but has chosen not to use that title,

She will be HM The Queen - just as the Queen Mother was HM The Queen when she was the consort of George VI, and Queen Mary was HM The Queen when she was the consort of George V.

The term 'consort' isn't used but is part of the title. It is simply not used any more than the term 'regnant' is used for a Queen who is Queen in her own right.

We don't say HM The Queen Regnant for Elizabeth II but simple HM The Queen. That was the case with The Queen Mother - HM The Queen during the reign of George VI not HM The Queen Consort.

 

[Hallo girl]

She will be HM The Queen - just as the Queen Mother was HM The Queen when she was the consort of George VI, and Queen Mary was HM The Queen when she was the consort of George V.

The term 'consort' isn't used but is part of the title. It is simply not used any more than the term 'regnant' is used for a Queen who is Queen in her own right.

We don't say HM The Queen Regnant for Elizabeth II but simple HM The Queen. That was the case with The Queen Mother - HM The Queen during the reign of George VI not HM The Queen Consort.

Exactly what I have been trying to say. Thank you, you have said it clearer than I managed to.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Can those claiming the word Consort has been part of the title in the past provide a citation to back up that claim?

I have never seen Consort in any documentation of titles of a British queen consort (as opposed to a description of a position). The full titles of the last queen consort, as proclaimed at her funeral, were

the late Most High, Most Mighty and Most Excellent Princess Elizabeth, Queen Dowager and Queen Mother, Lady of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Lady of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Lady of the Imperial Order of the Crown of India, Grand Master and Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order upon whom had been conferred the Royal Victorian Chain, Dame Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, Dame Grand Cross of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St John​

The word Regnant has never been included in the titles of British monarchs. The present Queen's full titles in the UK are

Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith​

 

[Hallo girl]

Can those claiming the word Consort has been part of the title in the past provide any citation to back up that claim?

I have never seen Consort in any documentation of titles of a British queen consort (as opposed to a description of a position). The full titles of the last queen consort, as proclaimed at her funeral, were

the late Most High, Most Mighty and Most Excellent Princess Elizabeth, Queen Dowager and Queen Mother, Lady of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Lady of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Lady of the Imperial Order of the Crown of India, Grand Master and Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order upon whom had been conferred the Royal Victorian Chain, Dame Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, Dame Grand Cross of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St John​

The word Regnant has never been included in the titles of British monarchs. The present Queen's full titles in the UK are

Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith​

You said it yourself the last queen consort,

The Queen signs herself Elizabeth R, what do you think the R stands for.

I am going to bed , night night

 

[Osipi]

One thing that will not change is the way HM, The Queen will be mentioned in the papers like the DM, Sun and perhaps American gossip sites. She'll still be referred to as "Camilla Parker Bowles". Some things just never go away.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

You said it yourself the last queen consort,

You have misread my post, I'm afraid. Neither I nor the two sources I cited claimed that Queen Consort was a title used by British queens consort.

The Queen signs herself Elizabeth R, what do you think the R stands for.

I assume it stands for Regina, Latin for Queen, as is established custom. I am not sure how that suggests that "Queen Regnant" is part of her title.

 

[Hallo girl]

You have misread my post, I'm afraid. Neither I nor the two sources I cited claimed that Queen Consort was a title used by British queens consort.

I am still going to bed.

 

[Saragli]

https://www.royal.uk/queen-elizabeth-queen-mother

"Albert, Duke of York, was proclaimed King George VI, and his Duchess became Queen Elizabeth, the first British-born Queen consort since Tudor times."

Regnant is how reigning/ruling Queens have always been distinguished from those that are the wives "consorts" of Kings. This is pretty established practice going back centuries. The debate here is surprising.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

https://www.royal.uk/queen-elizabeth-queen-mother

"Albert, Duke of York, was proclaimed King George VI, and his Duchess became Queen Elizabeth, the first British-born Queen consort since Tudor times."

Regnant is how reigning/ruling Queens have always been distinguished from those that are the wives "consorts" of Kings. This is pretty established practice going back centuries. The debate here is surprising.

I find the debate surprising as well, but for the inverse reason. No one debates that the descriptors "queen regnant" and "queen consort" can (and should) be used to distinguish wives of kings from female rulers of kingdoms. But the argument that Regnant and Consort exist as British titles is, as far as I can see, unsupported by the evidence.

In the quotation you posted the title and name Queen Elizabeth is capitalized while "consort", which is only a qualifier, is correctly uncapitalized.

 

[Saragli]

I think one may be reading into the capital C too much. The announcement sounds very much like HM wishes for Camilla to be known the way every other wife of a reigning King has been known in the UK. Pretty simple and straightforward.

 

[Hallo girl]

I find the debate surprising as well, but for the inverse reason. No one debates that the descriptors "queen regnant" and "queen consort" can (and should) be used to distinguish wives of kings from female rulers of kingdoms. But the argument that Regnant and Consort exist as British titles is, as far as I can see, unsupported by any evidence.

You will notice that in the quotation you posted, the title and name Queen Elizabeth is capitalized while "consort", which is only a qualifier, is correctly uncapitalized.

I know I said I was going to bed but are you now saying that queen consort is the wife of the king.
That is what we have been saying all along, my issue was that some people who had taken that the Queen in her statement tonight was in some way lowering Camillas status by referring to her as queen consort had the incorrect interpretation. Maybe it is the nuance of the English language. I know I keep repeating myself but I really do need to go to bed. This has been harder than a days work.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I think one may be reading into the capital C too much. The announcement sounds very much like HM wishes for Camilla to be known the way every other wife of a reigning King has been known in the UK. Pretty simple and straightforward.

You could be right. But in that case the intention would have been clearer if the statement had said "it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen as she continues her own loyal service", instead of "it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service."

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I know I said I was going to bed but are you now saying that queen consort is the wife of the king.
That is what we have been saying all along, my issue was that some people who had taken that the Queen in her statement tonight was in some way lowering Camillas status by referring to her as queen consort had the incorrect interpretation. Maybe it is the nuance of the English language. I know I keep repeating myself but I really do need to go to bed. This has been harder than a days work.

Yes, the term queen consort denotes the wife of a king. That is uncontroversial.

However, your earlier post stated "Queen consort is the correct title". Your and others' statement that Queen Consort exists as a legal title in Britain was the issue we were debating.

 

[Hallo girl]

Yes, the term queen consort denotes the wife of a king. That is uncontroversial.

However, your earlier post stated "Queen consort is the correct title". Your and others' statement that Queen Consort exists as a legal title in Britain was the issue we were debating.

I wasn't debating legal titles, I am now in bed . Goodnight God bless.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It seems there was a miscommunication then; the post to which you first replied was debating legal titles ("The problem is though that HM The Queen Consort creates many of the same legal problems as HRH The Princess Consort "). But that post was not quoted in this thread (I will quote it below) and perhaps that caused the miscommunication.

I am happy it has now been clarified. Good night to you.

The problem is though that HM The Queen Consort creates many of the same legal problems as HRH The Princess Consort with the added complication that it won't be well accepted by the public.

To me it is another PR mistake by the Prince of Wales, but since he seems to be in charge these days, he dragged his aging mother into it, on a day when the Queen, rather than Camilla, should have had the spotlight.

Sorry, but that is just how I feel.

Queen consort is the correct title, Queen Elizabeth the queen mother was a queen consort. We do not use the consort part of the title in everyday use but it is the correct title, Catherine will be Queen Consort.
As there has never been a referendum on how the people feel about Camilla I am not sure how we can make blanket statements that this will not be accepted by the public.
I genuinely feel that judgements about the royals are made based on twitter posts and the like. I was a great fan of Diana, but Camilla has settled in to her role and proved a great support to Charles and the crown and I think she deserves the recognition

 

[Saragli]

Suppose they do intend to create a separate "Queen Consort" title as some are suggesting...it does create an interesting backdoor into a "King Consort" title to even out the playing field. However, I do not think that is the intention of this announcement.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

I think one may be reading into the capital C too much. The announcement sounds very much like HM wishes for Camilla to be known the way every other wife of a reigning King has been known in the UK. Pretty simple and straightforward.

I agree. The wording could have been better and should have been something along the lined of as "...Camilla will be known as Queen, being Charles' consort, as she continues her own loyal service."

 

[Gawin]

I think one may be reading into the capital C too much. The announcement sounds very much like HM wishes for Camilla to be known the way every other wife of a reigning King has been known in the UK. Pretty simple and straightforward.

I agree. The Queen is a stickler for tradition and it would be surprising if she wanted a new title created for Camilla.

From the Sunday Times:
"Sources close to the Queen said she was keen to use her decades of experience to resolve the issue of Camilla’s future role while she still can and has been focusing on tying up loose ends since Philip died last year.
A senior royal aide said: "Ever since the duke’s passing, there has been an element of ‘I won’t be here for ever’, and an eagerness to pass on her experience to people and put certain things in place. She is making the point that she learnt from her own mother and father, and her own experience, what that role of consort takes.
"This reflects the duchess’s 17 years of loyal service and Her Majesty can see within her own family how happy she makes the prince." "

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

In my country Heinrich von Mecklenburg-Schwerin, Bernhard zur Lippe-Biesterfeld and Claus von Amsberg were the prins-gemaal (the Prince Consort). However they were never styled as such. It was always "The Prince". There is even a private letter from Queen Wilhelmina to her son-in-law Bernhard, on the eve of her abdication in 1948, that she sees him supporting her daughter in his own individual role as The Prince and not as The Prince-Consort indeed because she felt it as her son-in-law just being an appendix to his spouse. (That letter is mentioned in the official biography, second part, Wilhelmina, Warlike in a Formless Coat).

We saw the same in Denmark. Henri de Laborde de Monpezat was first known as HKH Prinsgemalen (HRH The Prince Consort). Later he had the same opinion as his Dutch colleagues: the title optically makes him just an appendix to his spouse and denies his unique own position in the Royal House. So also in Denmark the Royal House started to style him as HKH Prinsen (HRH The Prince).

Then we have two other 20th C Prince Consorts: Félix de Bourbon de Parme (spouse of Charlotte de Luxembourg) and Pierre de Polignac (spouse of Charlotte de Monaco). Also both were known as The Prince.

In all these cases, these six gentlemen were princes-consort but none of them was adressed as such (except Henrik of Denmark in the first half of his consortship). The seventh gentleman was Prince Philip, also he was never named Prince-Consort while actually being the consort indeed.