 |
|

12-17-2007, 06:17 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,841
|
|
|
His HRH outranks his Sir so he doesn't use it.
__________________
|

12-17-2007, 06:47 AM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,328
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
His HRH outranks his Sir so he doesn't use it.
|
But somehow I thought that titles you inherit are lesser than those you earn yourself?
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
|

12-17-2007, 07:06 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,841
|
|
|
I've never heard of that before but I'm orf to fish out the Debretts.
__________________
|

12-17-2007, 07:19 AM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,328
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
I've never heard of that before but I'm orf to fish out the Debretts.
|
Oh, please, do!
I seem to remember that a peer only used the "Sir" in front of his christian name if he was awarded the knighthood himself, but not if one of his direct line ancestors had been a baronet (which would allow this heir to use the title "Sir" in addition to bein the marquess of X or the duke of Y.). But I can be wrong.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
|

12-17-2007, 07:23 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 662
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine
Oh, please, do!
I seem to remember that a peer only used the "Sir" in front of his christian name if he was awarded the knighthood himself, but not if one of his direct line ancestors had been a baronet (which would allow this heir to use the title "Sir" in addition to bein the marquess of X or the duke of Y.). But I can be wrong.
|
HRH The Prince of Wales, KG (etc. etc.) is the correct form, he is not Sir Charles as the Prince outranks this, The only time I've seen sir used for a member of the RF was HRH Sir Philip Mountbatten, Duke of Edinburgh
__________________
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 59 Years of Dedicated and Devoted Service
God Save The Queen!
|

12-17-2007, 08:12 PM
|
|
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,674
|
|
|
Philip was never "Sir". His proper style after his marriage was HRH Philip, Duke of Edinburgh until formally created a Prince of the UK by letters patent in 1957.
|

12-17-2007, 09:21 PM
|
 |
Super Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,139
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
Philip was never "Sir". His proper style after his marriage was HRH Philip, Duke of Edinburgh until formally created a Prince of the UK by letters patent in 1957.
|
Actually, he was "Sir Philip Mountbatten" for a very short period of time, as he was given the Order of the Garter before being made an HRH, and then another day passed before his peerage was granted.
|

12-19-2007, 04:37 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 662
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
Philip was never "Sir". His proper style after his marriage was HRH Philip, Duke of Edinburgh until formally created a Prince of the UK by letters patent in 1957.
|
He was gazatted as HRH Sir Philip Mountbatten, Duke of Edinburgh at the time of the birth of The Prince Charles, check the London Gazette
__________________
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 59 Years of Dedicated and Devoted Service
God Save The Queen!
|

12-19-2007, 06:26 PM
|
|
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,674
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyalProtocol
He was gazatted as HRH Sir Philip Mountbatten, Duke of Edinburgh at the time of the birth of The Prince Charles, check the London Gazette
|
That's very odd. Having the style and rank of HRH takes precedence over being "Sir".
|

12-19-2007, 06:45 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 662
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
That's very odd. Having the style and rank of HRH takes precedence over being "Sir".
|
I realise its odd, but The King wanted to make a point that while he was an HRH he wasn't a Prince just a Knight of The Garter.
__________________
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 59 Years of Dedicated and Devoted Service
God Save The Queen!
|

12-21-2007, 01:07 AM
|
 |
Super Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,139
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyalProtocol
He was gazatted as HRH Sir Philip Mountbatten, Duke of Edinburgh at the time of the birth of The Prince Charles, check the London Gazette
|
When the letters patent making Charles a Prince and a Royal Highness were gazetted, he was styled as "His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh," which is still odd as he wasn't technically a Prince.
Gazette Website: PDF Navigator
When he was granted his peerage, he was gazetted as "HRH Sir Philip Mountbatten, KG, RN" though, which makes sense as he was an HRH (as of the previous paragraph) but not a Duke. I think it's the peerage style that trumps "Sir," not the HRH.
Gazette Website: PDF Navigator
Quote:
The KING has been pleased by Letters Patent
under the Great Seal of the Realm, bearing date the
20th instant, to confer the dignity of a Duke of the
United Kingdom upon Lieutenant His Royal Highness
Sir Philip Mountbatten, K.G., R'.N., and«the heirs
male of his body lawfully begotten, by the name, style
and title of BARON GREENWICH, of Greenwich in the
County of London, EARL OF MERIONETH, and DUKE
OF EDINBURGH.
|
|

12-21-2007, 03:32 AM
|
 |
Gentry
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Labasa, Fiji
Posts: 71
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by samitude
Prince Andrew received the title Duke of York upon his wedding day I believe. I don't think he's had this title since he was a baby.
Also, Viscount Linley's daughter is referred to as the Honorable Margarita Armstrong-Jones. Her brother Patrick is the Honorable Charles Armstrong-Jones and will become Viscount Linley when his father gains the title Earl of Snowdon which will be upon the present Earl of Snowdon's death. At least that's the way I understand this.
I believe Sophie didn't want the title of princess. She would have received it by marrying Edward, but asked not to.
|
No, that is not the case. Sophie would only be officially addressed as Princess Sophie if she had been born a princess ie. a princess of the blood royal. Since she is not a princess by birth, she can only take on Prince Edward's title, and will keep it till either death or divorce.
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
If she abdicated, she would revert to the style and title of HRH The Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh. Since she is The Sovereign, she can only be HM The Queen and nothing else at the present time. The fount of honour cannot be a Peer.
|
If Queen Elizabeth II of the UK abdicated, she may also choose to be addressed as HM The Queen Mother of the UK, rather than revert to her title before accession.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Australian
I think it is possible, I think HM Queen Juliana of The Netherlands demoted to HRH Princess Juliana on her abdication.
|
No, she wasn't demoted. She chose to be addressed so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by selrahc4
Interesting question since he is not a peer. "Marie-Christine, Princess Michael of Kent"? "Marie-Christine Windsor"?
"Marie-Christine von Reibnitz-Troubridge-Windsor"? 
|
If the case of divorce, she no longer has any right to the name Windsor.
|

12-21-2007, 07:27 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,841
|
|
|
She's got no right to the surname Windsor but she could use it as alot of divorcees use their marital surname after the split. In Marie Christine's case, I think she'd go back to being a von.
__________________
|

12-21-2007, 01:41 PM
|
 |
Super Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,139
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinulord
If Queen Elizabeth II of the UK abdicated, she may also choose to be addressed as HM The Queen Mother of the UK, rather than revert to her title before accession.
|
That would require an Act of Parliament (which would probably be easy since the abdication does too), as it would grant the style and title of a Queen to a person no longer entitled to it. She couldn't simply choose to be so.
When Edward VIII abdicated, he immediately became HRH Prince Edward (and was announced as so for his radio address), just as the Queen would become HRH Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh.
|

12-21-2007, 02:14 PM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,683
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson
That would require an Act of Parliament (which would probably be easy since the abdication does too), as it would grant the style and title of a Queen to a person no longer entitled to it. She couldn't simply choose to be so.
When Edward VIII abdicated, he immediately became HRH Prince Edward (and was announced as so for his radio address), just as the Queen would become HRH Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh.
|
Do you think that after so many years of reign when HM Queen Elizabeth II f.ex. abdicate people will start call her HRH Princess Elizabeth or the Duches of Edinburgh... She always will be HM Queen Elizabeth II.
About Queen Juliana after that what is write on wikipedia after her abdication she was was officially styled as Her Majesty Juliana, Queen Mother of the Netherlands, but she wished to be known as HRH Princess Juliana of the Netherlands.
|

12-21-2007, 02:18 PM
|
 |
Super Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,139
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnik
Do you think that after so many years of reign when HM Queen Elizabeth II f.ex. abdicate people will start call her HRH Princess Elizabeth or the Duches of Edinburgh... She always will be HM Queen Elizabeth II.
|
Oh, I know that's what people would call her, it's just not what she would be without an Act of Parliament or a section in the abdication act granting it to her.
|

12-21-2007, 02:57 PM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,683
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson
Oh, I know that's what people would call her, it's just not what she would be without an Act of Parliament or a section in the abdication act granting it to her.
|
Right  Different wishes of people and the law.
|

12-21-2007, 07:07 PM
|
 |
Gentry
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Labasa, Fiji
Posts: 71
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnik
Right  Different wishes of people and the law.
|
Yes, but the law may also have to go hand in hand with the wishes of the people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson
That would require an Act of Parliament (which would probably be easy since the abdication does too), as it would grant the style and title of a Queen to a person no longer entitled to it. She couldn't simply choose to be so. When Edward VIII abdicated, he immediately became HRH Prince Edward (and was announced as so for his radio address), just as the Queen would become HRH Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh.
|
But wont they give her the option before the enactment of the new title? I'm sure the British parliament (and whoever else is in charge of this matter) would be courteous enough to do so.
__________________
Hon ER, Sinulord
|

12-21-2007, 09:20 PM
|
 |
Super Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,139
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinulord
But wont they give her the option before the enactment of the new title? I'm sure the British parliament (and whoever else is in charge of this matter) would be courteous enough to do so.
|
I'm sure they would, but they wouldn't be obligated to do so.
|

12-22-2007, 09:33 AM
|
 |
Super Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Esslingen, Germany
Posts: 2,095
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnik
About Queen Juliana after that what is write on wikipedia after her abdication she was was officially styled as Her Majesty Juliana, Queen Mother of the Netherlands, but she wished to be known as HRH Princess Juliana of the Netherlands.
|
She was styled as HRH Princess Juliana of the Netherlands after her abdication. the same as her mother Wilhelmina. Only after the died the are referred as HM Queen of the Netherlands. I think in the case of Wilhelmina there was even a decree from Juliana. In the case of Juliana she is only reffered as HM Queen since after the funeral. You will see that on the offiicial memorial page she is referred as Princess Juliana in the Press Releases.
It is also in the Act of the membeship of the Royal House that an abdicated monarch will become HRH Prince/Princess. So if Beatrix abdicates she becomes HRH Princess Beatrix.
|
 |
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional Links |
|
|
|