Questions about British Styles and Titles

[Avalon]

Indeed, she would be HRH X, Duchess of Y. Thanks for correcting Beatrixfan!

[wbenson]

She wouldn't be X except in popular culture.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by Avalon

Indeed, she would be HRH X, Duchess of Y. Thanks for correcting Beatrixfan!

She will be simply HRH The Duchess of Y. But she will have the privilege of signing her letters only with her first name.

There was a vivid discussion when the Duke of York in 1923 wanted to marry a non-royal who was "only" an earl's daughter about the questiuon if this mere earl's daughter should have the same rights as the women born Royal. They even looked intensively into the past to Lady Anne Hyde and tried to figure out if back then there were rules on how Lady Anne signed after her marriage into the Royal family but they couldn't find consistent proof that the people back then had even thought about that.

So they advised HM to follow the rule that a wife takes her rank from her husband, thus Lady Elizabthe Bowes-Lyon was considered Royal after her marriage and signed herself only "Elizabeth" and not "Elizabeth York" like a peeress who takes her first name plus the name part of her husband's/her own title.

[branchg]

Technically, she would sign her name as "Elizabeth, Duchess of York" as the wife of a Peer. Because she was marrying a son of the Sovereign, it was agreed she automatically took the rank of her husband as HRH and a princess ("HRH The Princess Albert"). She then would sign her name as "Elizabeth".

Ironically, when this question arose again with the marriage of Edward and Wallis, the Government found it convenient to overlook this conclusion reached in 1923 and state "royal rank was at the discretion of the Sovereign" and not automatic.

[Menarue]

Was Kate Middleton actually representing Prince William at the wedding? Surely she, as a friend, would be invited to the wedding and just because Prince William couldn´t be present wouldn´t be a reason to uninvite her. She and Chelsy were sitting in privileged seats so she may well have been representing him....

[PrinceOfCanada]

Originally Posted by branchg

Technically, she would sign her name as "Elizabeth, Duchess of York" as the wife of a Peer. Because she was marrying a son of the Sovereign, it was agreed she automatically took the rank of her husband as HRH and a princess ("HRH The Princess Albert"). She then would sign her name as "Elizabeth".

My understanding is that peers & peeresses are all entitled to sign with their first name only.

Ironically, when this question arose again with the marriage of Edward and Wallis, the Government found it convenient to overlook this conclusion reached in 1923 and state "royal rank was at the discretion of the Sovereign" and not automatic.

That's not really irony, it's expediency. That being said, the monarchy has always reserved to itself the right to grant or deny titles, styles, and rank.

[Warren]

Here's something interesting...
From Royal Insight, May 2005:

Can you please give us more information on the life of Princess Mary, daughter of King George V and Queen Mary?

Princess Mary was born on April 25, 1897 at York Cottage on the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk, England.

Her father was His Royal Highness Prince George, Duke of York (later King George V), the second eldest son of King Edward VII. Her mother was Her Royal Highness The Duchess of York (later Queen Mary), the only daughter of The Duke of Teck.

As a great-granddaughter of Queen Victoria, Mary was styled Her Highness Princess Mary of York from birth.

[my bolding] From her birth in 1897 to the death of Queen Victoria on 22 January 1901 Princess Mary was a "mere" HH. Did this lesser style apply only to females, or were her brothers Princes Albert and Henry also HHs for a short time, while the eldest son, Edward, was an HRH?

We are familiar with the Letters Patent of 1917 stipulating who holds the HRH, but what was the situation prior to that revision? Edward VII in 1905 raised his granddaughters Ladies Alexandra and Maud Duff to the rank of Princess with the style of Highness, and Prince Alastair of Connaught was an HH Prince of Great Britain and Ireland from his birth in 1914 until 1917. The only other cases I can recall of the use of HH (albeit after George V's Letters Patent) are the Princesses Helena Victoria and Marie Louise who relinquished their German titles of Schleswig-Holstein and Anhalt respectively in 1917 to become HH Princesses [of nothing].

[cmkrcwi]

Wasn't the son of Prince and Princess Arthur of Connaught briefly known as "HH Prince Alistair of Connaught"?

[Warren]

Yes, I've mentioned Prince Alastair in the second line of the last paragraph.

[cmkrcwi]

Warren, Oops, sorry about that. I should have read your post more closely.

[branchg]

Originally Posted by Warren

From her birth in 1897 to the death of Queen Victoria on 22 January 1901 Princess Mary was a "mere" HH. Did this lesser style apply only to females, or were her brothers Princes Albert and Henry also HHs for a short time, while the eldest son, Edward, was an HRH?

We are familiar with the Letters Patent of 1917 stipulating who holds the HRH, but what was the situation prior to that revision? Edward VII in 1905 raised his granddaughters Ladies Alexandra and Maud Duff to the rank of Princess with the style of Highness, and Prince Alastair of Connaught was an HH Prince of Great Britain and Ireland from his birth in 1914 until 1917. The only other cases I can recall of the use of HH (albeit after George V's Letters Patent) are the Princesses Helena Victoria and Marie Louise who relinquished their German titles of Schleswig-Holstein and Anhalt respectively in 1917 to become HH Princesses [of nothing].

Prior to the 1917 Letters Patent, great-grandchildren in the male-line of The Sovereign held the title and style of HH Prince/Princess of Great Britain and Ireland. Grandchildren of The Sovereign in the male-line held the rank of HRH.

Prince Eddy was still alive when The Duke and Duchess of York's children were born, so they only held the rank of Highness as great-grandchildren of Queen Victoria. After his death, Prince George became the spare to the throne after his father, so Queen Victoria issued letters patent granting his children the rank of HRH.

Many of Victoria's female line grandchildren and great-grandchildren held titles and styles granted as members of the blood of German royal houses. After these titles were abolished by the Weimar Republic and George V issued the new letters patent, many of them continued to be granted the courtesy of being known as a Princess, even though they were not British princesses, because they had lived most of their lives in Britain.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by branchg

Prior to the 1917 Letters Patent, great-grandchildren in the male-line of The Sovereign held the title and style of HH Prince/Princess of Great Britain and Ireland. Grandchildren of The Sovereign in the male-line held the rank of HRH.

Prince Eddy was still alive when The Duke and Duchess of York's children were born, so they only held the rank of Highness as great-grandchildren of Queen Victoria. After his death, Prince George became the spare to the throne after his father, so Queen Victoria issued letters patent granting his children the rank of HRH..

Prince Eddy wasn't alive wehen the children of the Duke and Duchess of York were born. He died in 1892 and the future Edward VIII. was born. Also Mary would have married him insteád the future George V. as she was engaged to him.

[Warren]

Please note that the Mary in Stefan's post above refers to Queen Mary (Princess May of Teck) and not Mary of York, later Princess Royal.
Prince Edward of York (later Edward VIII and Duke of Windsor) was born in 1894.

[aria753]

I curious to know, does anyone know what title Prince Michael would have recieved if his marriage was approved? Also what titles would Princess Anne and Princess Alexandra husband's recieved if they taken one?

[morhange]

Prince Michael wouldn't get a title. His brother is the one with the ducal title. His marriage was approved, the British Royal Family has been much more lax with non-equal marriages than other countries (three of George V's daughter-in-laws would be considered unequal marriages, especially Wallis Simpson, and his son-in-law was "just a peer") but the only reason anything is wrong with Michael's marriage is that he married a papist and lost his place in the line of succession. He wouldn't have any title other than Prince Michael of Kent, whether he'd married Marie-Christine or a princess of the royal blood.

As for Anne and Alexandra, their husbands would probably have gotten earldoms. I know the queen offered one to Angus Ogilvy but he declined.

[aria753]

Thanks. So that means the Duke of Gloucester would have also been like Prince Michael if his brother lived, Prince and Princess Richard of Gloucester. I had always assumed along with Prince they would recieve something else like Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex.

[kimebear]

Prince Edward is the son of the sovereign. As the son of the sovereign, HRH The Prince George (Prince Michael's father) received the additional title Duke of Kent upon his marriage. This is usually a practice reserved for the children of the sovereign only. Prince Michael is HRH Prince Michael of Kent as he is the granchild of a sovereign in the male line. Prince Michael's older brother, HRH Prince Edward of Kent succeeded his father as HRH The Duke of Kent. Upon the current Duke's death, his son, the Earl of St. Andrews will succeed to the title Duke of Kent as a peer, not as a royal duke.

[BeatrixFan]

Ogilvy was offered an Earldom but he declined it. He did accept a Knighthood but that was only because it was earned through his charity work and not by virtue of marriage.

[Rebafan81]

I am so in awe of members of this forum and feel so very lucky to be able to take part, your knowledge of royalty is amazing. How can I learn more about English titles?

[BeatrixFan]

Hi Reba!

You should buy "Debretts Correct Form". It's about $14 and it'll tell you every detail you need to know about titles. And the details you don't!