The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #401  
Old 07-17-2007, 11:12 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
The wife of the King must be Queen Consort as there is no other style or title for her use. A very different situation than being both a princess of the UK and a duchess by virtue of marriage.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #402  
Old 07-18-2007, 12:22 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Carmel, United States
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post
The wife of the King must be Queen Consort as there is no other style or title for her use. A very different situation than being both a princess of the UK and a duchess by virtue of marriage.
Couldn't she style herself The Duchess of Lancaster? But I see your point, this is not a good example.

I'm sorry I barged in here and started rambling to no point, but I think I've found a way to express this coherently.

In the Wallis case, the Yorks wanted to deny Wallis the HRH. Legal opinion was unanimous: the sovereign does not have that power. That a woman who marries takes her husband's rank is well-settled; whatever Edward has, Wallis gets. Edward is HRH. Therefore Wallis is HRH. The only way to stop it is to take away Edward's HRH.

But the sovereign insisted that a way be found for Edward to remain HRH while Wallis does not become one. An exchange of memos between legal experts at Parliament and Buckingham jury-rigged a justification that might get to the desired result:

1. "HRH" is a style that describes the substantive dignity of being in the line of succession in the degree specified by the 1917 LP.
2. By abdicating, Edward gave up his place in the line of succession and hence the substantive dignity that gave him the right to use the "HRH".
3. Edward is therefore no longer entitled to use the HRH style, but since the 1917 grants the style to a son of the sovereign, and nothing can change the fact that Edward was born the son of a sovereign, he might continue to use the HRH style.
4. It is to be understood however that since Edward no longer has an absolute claim to the HRH by virtue of the substantive dignity of being in the line of succession, his use of the style after Abdication is by gift of the sovereign under the terms of the 1917 LP.
5. Since Edward's HRH is a gift and not an entitlement, and since Common Law is clear that you cannot derive a greater benefit from a lesser, Wallis's marital courtesy claim to HRH is no less conditional than Edwards.
6. Therefore it is up to the sovereign whether or not Wallis gets HRH.

That's what happened. It was never the case that the sovereign has any control over marital courtesy titles by virtue of being the font of honour, or because abdication created a situation not contemplated by law. The principle that a woman takes her husband's rank, and that Wallis is entitled to a valid HRH, was affirmed at the outset and was never questioned. A defect had to be found in Edward's HRH.

It was not, Chrissy, that Edward forfeited his HRH and the sovereign reissued it with the caveat that it doesn't go to Wallis; the sovereign does not have that power. The HRH Edward got in effect carried no rank, which is what the wife is entitled to, and that's why it could be denied.

How do we get from there, to Sarah and Diana losing HRH, when that a woman keeps her husband's rank upon divorce is no less well-settled than that she takes it upon marriage?

Chrissy notes that HRH might work like "Her Grace" being lost by the divorced wife of a duke. But in that example the woman keeps the rank of her husband, by taking the dukedom as her surname. The requirement is not identical language, the requirement is the same rank.

But Sarah and Diana, they lost their rank despite no defects in the HRH's of their husbands. That Diana kept some form of the Wales desigation isn't enough, by the logic of the Wallis case, because only HRH describes the rank of being in the line of succession.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #403  
Old 07-18-2007, 05:38 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
There is no question The Duke had the right, as a son of George V, to remain HRH despite the Abdication so long as The Sovereign continued to recognize him as such. The problem with denying Wallis the title was in allowing Edward to retain it himself, which was a mistake on the King's part. There was no such thing as a morganatic marriage in Great Britain and, yet, it was created by the Crown and the Government in 1937 to punish Edward for marrying her after giving up the throne.

On the other hand, it was clear from reviewing the letters patent of George II, George III, Victoria and Edward VII on conferring HRH and Prince/Princess of the UK that the intent was to grant recognition to those members of the royal family in close succession to the throne. Obviously, there was no thought given to a divorce or abdication at that time, so it was reasonable to assume new letters patent could be issued to deal with those situations.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #404  
Old 08-28-2007, 11:29 AM
zembla's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Camden, United States
Posts: 875
If Charles had a daughter with Diana would she have also been a Princess of Wales?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #405  
Old 08-28-2007, 11:34 AM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
Their daughter would've been Princess (name) of Wales.
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
Reply With Quote
  #406  
Old 08-28-2007, 11:34 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
No, she'd have been known as Princess [Name] of Wales while Charles was Prince of Wales and then she'd have just been The Princess [Name] once he became King. The Prince of Wales title is reserved for sons.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #407  
Old 08-28-2007, 12:51 PM
PR Princess's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London/ New Jersey (USA), United Kingdom
Posts: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
No, she'd have been known as Princess [Name] of Wales while Charles was Prince of Wales and then she'd have just been The Princess [Name] once he became King. The Prince of Wales title is reserved for sons.
What will happen if Prince William and Harry have children, what will their titles be?
__________________
"Some people make headlines, while others make history."

Philip Elmer-Dewitt, in Time Magazine
Reply With Quote
  #408  
Old 08-28-2007, 12:58 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
If they have children before the Charles becomes king there children will be known as Lord/Lady Mountbatten-Windsor.
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
Reply With Quote
  #409  
Old 08-28-2007, 01:00 PM
PR Princess's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London/ New Jersey (USA), United Kingdom
Posts: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
If they have children before the Charles becomes king there children will be known as Lord/Lady Mountbatten-Windsor.
Wow not even prince or even princess...thanx for the info.
__________________
"Some people make headlines, while others make history."

Philip Elmer-Dewitt, in Time Magazine
Reply With Quote
  #410  
Old 08-28-2007, 08:23 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
If they have children before the Charles becomes king there children will be known as Lord/Lady Mountbatten-Windsor.
William's eldest son would be HRH Prince X under the 1917 Letters Patent. His other children would be Lord/Lady Mountbatten-Windsor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PR Princess View Post
Wow not even prince or even princess...thanx for the info.
Unless The Queen issues letters patent creating them HRH Prince/Princess of the UK, which is highly unlikely.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #411  
Old 09-01-2007, 06:01 PM
RoyalProtocol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 670
Completly unrelated but I was wondering if Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester should not have been corectly referred to as HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester or HRH The Dowager Duchess of Gloucester.

I understand why Princess Marina adopted this style after all she was a Princess in her own right,Alice was on The Lady Alice Montague-Douglas-Scot before her marriage.

I was under the impression that only princess of the Blood Royal could be know as HRH (The) Princess Own Name (Anne, Alexandra, Margaret, Beatrice etc.) while others were HRH (The) Princess husbands name (Micheal of Kent etc.)

While I am aware that Her Majesty approved of the style Her Royal Highness adopted should correct form, social etiquette precedent and Buckingham Palace's obsession with doing things properly not have dictated that she remain The Princess Henry after all a widow remains Mrs. John Smith while only a divorcee is correctly Mrs. Jane Smith.
__________________
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
59 Years of Dedicated and Devoted Service

God Save The Queen!



Reply With Quote
  #412  
Old 09-01-2007, 08:01 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 353
Princess Alice

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyalProtocol View Post
Completly unrelated but I was wondering if Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester should not have been corectly referred to as HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester or HRH The Dowager Duchess of Gloucester.
You're correct. She wanted to differentiate herself from the new Duchess of Gloucester, but didn't care for the 'Dowager' title. The Queen allowed her aunt to adopt a similiar style as used by the Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #413  
Old 09-01-2007, 08:09 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Didn't the Queen create Alice a Princess in her own right to enable her to use Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #414  
Old 09-01-2007, 08:20 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,515
No, it was just a courtsey title. But, it really didn't matter. She was older and know one would have known she was going to live until she was 102 years old. Not that that mattered.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #415  
Old 09-02-2007, 12:37 AM
PR Princess's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London/ New Jersey (USA), United Kingdom
Posts: 125
How come Princess Anne, Princess of Royal daughter Zara Phillips and her son don't have titles of their own?
__________________
"Some people make headlines, while others make history."

Philip Elmer-Dewitt, in Time Magazine
Reply With Quote
  #416  
Old 09-02-2007, 02:20 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,242
Grandchildren of the sovereign through a female line don't automatically hold any style or title, and their father wasn't granted one of his own.

Had, say, Mark Phillips been granted the title of "Earl of Anywhere", with the subsidiary title of "Viscount Nonsuch," Peter would be "Viscount Nonsuch," and Zara would be "The Lady Zara Phillips."
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #417  
Old 09-02-2007, 02:29 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by PR Princess View Post
How come Princess Anne, Princess of Royal daughter Zara Phillips and her son don't have titles of their own?

May I make a technical point - Anne's title is 'The Princess Royal' not Princess OF Royal (I am just pointing out a minor error of no real consequence and I hope that I am not causing offence in giving you the correct wording of Anne's title).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #418  
Old 09-02-2007, 03:14 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan View Post
Didn't the Queen create Alice a Princess in her own right to enable her to use Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester?
I don't think Letters Patent were ever issued, which is what would have been needed to create her a Princess in her own right formally. I doubt the Queen would have formally gone against what George V had decided where HRHs are concerned. However, as the daughter of one of the "common little Scottish girls" so despised by the excruciatingly blue-blooded Princess Marina, perhaps she thought the other common little Scottish girl deserved her own Princess style even if it wasn't official.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #419  
Old 09-02-2007, 10:55 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan View Post
Didn't the Queen create Alice a Princess in her own right to enable her to use Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester?
No, she did not. However, Alice was already a princess of the UK by marriage ("HRH The Princess Henry"), so essentially The Queen was granting her the style of HRH Princess of the UK in her own right, as the widow of a son of the Sovereign.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #420  
Old 09-02-2007, 11:08 AM
RoyalProtocol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 670
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post
No, she did not. However, Alice was already a princess of the UK by marriage ("HRH The Princess Henry"), so essentially The Queen was granting her the style of HRH Princess of the UK in her own right, as the widow of a son of the Sovereign.
Was she really a Princess of The UK? Is a Princess of the UK not a Princess of The Blood Royal? Was Alice not still a commoner married to a Prince of The Blood Royal and thus entitled to use her husband's title by virture of the marriage? Her Majesty would surely have had to issue letters patent or at the very least a statement to give Alice any rights of a Princess of the UK.
__________________

__________________
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
59 Years of Dedicated and Devoted Service

God Save The Queen!



Reply With Quote
Reply

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


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

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Questions About [non-British] Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 729 10-09-2014 04:24 PM
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess Prince Harry and Prince William 1110 07-12-2014 10:00 PM
Diana's Styles and Titles florawindsor Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 573 11-14-2013 11:59 AM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 36 08-08-2013 12:05 PM
Abdication Beatrix and Inauguration WA: Titles, Names, Succession, Precedence Princess Robijn Abdication & Inauguration 2013 67 05-24-2013 03:14 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympics ottoman poland pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:53 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

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

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]