Questions about British Styles and Titles 1: Ending 2022

[branchg]

I think it would be a much, much bigger deal if he chose to do it, and I don't think he ever would. His father is the future king and then his brother. Harry is much closer to the throne than James and Louise and he's been raised to be a major member of the Royal Family.

It would be a big deal if Harry did it now, but the reality is once William and Catherine have children, he will become far less important in terms of succession.

 

[Warren]

It may come as a surprise to some but there is a pre-existing thread discussing the ins and outs of Prince Philip's Greek citizenship and his former titles. The current discussion has therefore been moved to the Prince Philip's former Greek Citizenship and Greek and Danish Titles thread.

In passing I'll note that quoting one's own posts repeatedly in an effort to gain the desired response is not only aggravating but poor form (I'm in the process of reducing the amount of repetitive material that appears in the current discussion).

I'll also take this opportunity to point out that constructive discussion is enhanced by a civil tone. Making repeated (and repetitive) demands of members on whatever side of a debate and/or appearing to be contemptuously dismissive of another member's arguments is not the way to achieve this.

thanks.

Warren
British Forums moderator

 

[kbk]

To give her the title Princess Consort the marriage will have to be declared morganatic and that will take parliament to pass legislation to strip her of the title The Queen and that will then be the case.

I don't see how giving Camilla the title of The Princess Consort in her own right will make the marriage morganatic.

There is no such thing like a morganatic marriage in the UK. It all depends on the Sovereign's consent to the marriage of a member of his or her family. The marriages without such Royal permission are invalid by law (I don't really know on what base Edward VIII wanted to make his marriage to Wallis Simpson legally morganatic).

Thus, Camilla, as legal spouse of Charles, will be his queen consort whatever anyone thinks about it.
IMO the Duchess of Cornwall will be (and should be) the Queen by style, not only formally a queen consort with a lesser title like the Princess Consort.

 

[DukeOfAster]

There is no such thing like a morganatic marriage in the UK. It all depends on the Sovereign's consent to the marriage of a member of his or her family. The marriages without such Royal permission are invalid by law. IMO the Duchess of Cornwall will be (and should be) the Queen by style, not only formally a queen consort with a lesser title like the Princess Consort.

I agree completely!! She has paid her dues and should be Queen. If Diana's children can get along with her a nation should.

 

[Artemisia]

There is no such thing like a morganatic marriage in the UK. It all depends on the Sovereign's consent to the marriage of a member of his or her family. The marriages without such Royal permission are invalid by law (I don't really know on what base Edward VIII wanted to make his marriage to Wallis Simpson legally morganatic).

Thus, Camilla, as legal spouse of Charles, will be his queen consort whatever anyone thinks about it.
IMO the Duchess of Cornwall will be (and should be) the Queen by style, not only formally a queen consort with a lesser title like the Princess Consort.

I am aware of it and that was, in fact, my point. Once Charles and Camilla got the Sovereign's consent, that was all they needed.

However, even if in future the concept of morganatic marriage is introduced into the British Royal Family, Camilla still couldn't and wouldn't be considered one; she has already been accepted as an equal (non-morganatic) wife by becoming The Princess of Wales.

Obviously, Camilla will be Queen Consort; unless Acts of Parliament are passed in all 16 Commonwealth Realms, there is no other way. What we were discussing is how it would be possible for Camilla to be styled as The Princess Consort (while legally remaining a Queen).

 

[AnnEliza]

Can someone answer this? I'm sorry if this has already been addressed, but I haven't found it if it has. Why would Camilla want to be Princess Consort instead of Queen? I mean during more than 1000 years of British history, the wife of the king is the queen. And although I (sort of) understand she didn't want to upset people by "replacing" Diana as Princess of Wales, Diana was never Queen. I just don't understand why anyone thinks the Princess Consort title, or style, is a good idea.

 

[Artemisia]

Can someone answer this? I'm sorry if this has already been addressed, but I haven't found it if it has. Why would Camilla want to be Princess Consort instead of Queen? I mean during more than 1000 years of British history, the wife of the king is the queen. And although I (sort of) understand she didn't want to upset people by "replacing" Diana as Princess of Wales, Diana was never Queen. I just don't understand why anyone thinks the Princess Consort title, or style, is a good idea.

At the time of the marriage, the Palace was unsure whether Camilla would be accepted. Back then, little was known about Camilla Parker Bowles bar from the highly unflattering portrayals of the "third woman" coming mainly from pro-Diana biographies. To placate the die-hard Diana fans and to minimise any damage to the Crown, a decision was made to announce that, after Charles ascends to the Throne, Camilla will be known as The Princess Consort, rather then Her Majesty The Queen.

Whether they will actually proceed with the plan or not remains to be seen. Either way, it is almost certain that Camilla will in fact be The Queen Consort, but will just opt to be known (at least initially) as The Princess Consort. The wife of a British Monarch is automatically a Queen and to legally deny Camilla that right Acts of Parliament would need to be passed in all sixteen Commonwealth Realms - and personally I don't see that ever happening. There is no question of Camilla being Charles' morganatic wife because a) she has already been accepted as his "equal" wife and The Princess of Wales (even if she doesn't use the title) and b) there is no such thing as morganatic marriage in Britain.

Now, whether the idea was Camilla's or not, or whether she actually likes/approves the plan has never been announced. It has been reported over the years that the Duchess doesn't particularly care about her future title and will be perfectly fine if she is known as The Princess Consort.

 

[padams2359]

It is all due to the fact that she is divorced. Prince Charles was divorced, but with Princess Diana's death, he became a widower, then remarried. If the Duchess's ex husband does not survive the reigning monarch, that may change things. I think the royal family is trying not to ruffle the feathers of the staunch monarchists who they need to survive, and still have the person the monarch wants as a companion. No repeat of Edward VIII.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Because of the past Camilla has with Charles, and her relationship with 'certain' members of the British public.

 

[branchg]

Obviously, Camilla will be Queen Consort; unless Acts of Parliament are passed in all 16 Commonwealth Realms, there is no other way. What we were discussing is how it would be possible for Camilla to be styled as The Princess Consort (while legally remaining a Queen).

It is not possible for Camilla to hold a rank and title her husband does not hold unless Letters Patent are issued granting her one. It would have to be created before Charles becomes King and she succeeds in rank to Queen.

Once that is done, there is an argument to be made that she can choose to be known by her own title and rank, rather than use her legal one as Queen Consort.

 

[AnnEliza]

...Whether they will actually proceed with the plan or not remains to be seen.

Thank you, that really helps clear it up for me. It will be interesting to see what happens when the time comes.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Charles did himself no favours when he and or BP decided to style Camilla as the Duchess of Cornwall and not Princess of Wales
I realise it was a tricky political situation for him but if Camilla is really 'not negotiable' than he and she should have stuck to their guns and said the wife of the Prince of Wales is the Princess of Wales and be done with it

Camilla isn't the most popular royal with the people and after 7 years she is no closer to being the Princess of Wales in the hearts of the public than when she started out.

We all know the title of a king's wife is a queen but once again as of tonight on the Prince of Wales website under FAQ about Camilla it states "As was explained at the time of their wedding in April 2005, it is intended that The Duchess will be known as HRH The Princess Consort when The Prince of Wales accedes to The Throne."

Charles has no wiggle room with the public. He has painted himself into a corner with Camilla's styles and titles and the public and tabloid press will hold him to it.
As long as Charles' reign lasts, you'll never once hear or see in print Camilla referred to as queen and that is a pathetic state of affairs if you ask me

 

[branchg]

Well, no one knows what will happen in the future and there is every reason to believe Charles is years away from the throne given his mother's good health and stamina. I think Camilla will be Queen when the time comes.

 

[padams2359]

As we all know, the BRF pays very close attention to polls. I think it was a presumptive strike to tell the world that Camilla would be called the Princess Consort after Charles takes the thrown. We also know that it can take up to a year for the coronation to take place. I am sure the Firm will check the pulse of the people as to whether or not she will be involved in the coronation, or simple a spectator. Many people say that she is automatically the Queen Consort, however, I feel that if she is not standing beside him to be crowned herself, she should not have the title of Queen Consort. Will she stand there and be crowned with the Queen Mother's crown?

 

[Artemisia]

You don't have to crowned to be King or Queen; Charles will become King immediately after his mother passes away, and Camilla will likewise become his Queen Consort at the same time. To deny her the title, Acts of Parliament will need to be passed in all Commonwealth Realms - and that's not going to happen.

The coronation of a Queen Consort is an extremely simple (and quick) ceremony right at the end of the King's coronation. Which crown Camilla will be crowned with is unknown as of now; the tradition since the time of the Mary of Modena is that every new Queen Consort had a crown made specifically made for her. Thus, a new crown may be commissioned for Camilla, or she may use one of the crowns of the previous Queens Consort.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

No one has to 'deny' Camilla anything. No one denied her Princess of Wales but the calculation was made she would be stoned on the streets of London (as it was she was booed loudly but that was then and this is now)
My only point is you can't force the public to accept her or call her 'Queen Camilla' just because she is entitled to it.
Can anyone imagine the DM running an article on 'Queen Camilla'? I'm not hating either because I like all members of my royal family, but her situation was handled poorly from the start regarding her title and Charles has left himself little room to maneuver

 

[VictoriaB]

Can somebody tell me when Queen Consorts started being crowned? I had a feeling it's a relatively new development.

 

[Artemisia]

Can somebody tell me when Queen Consorts started being crowned? I had a feeling it's a relatively new development.

Actually, the tradition is as old as the English Monarchy and certainly older than the British.
The first Queen Consort to be crowned in a separate coronation ceremony was Matilda of Flanders (wife of William the Conqueror).
The first Queen Consort to be crowned in a joint ceremony with her husband was Eleanor of Aquitaine (wife of Henry II of England).

Since Matilda of Flanders in 11th century only eight Queens Consort weren't crowned (and four of them were Henry VIII's wives):
- Margaret of France (Edward I's second wife)
- Jane Seymour (Henry VIII's third wife)
- Anne of Cleves (Henry VIII's fourth wife)
- Catherine Howard (Henry VIII's fifth wife)
- Catherine Parr (Henry VIII's sixth wife)
- Henrietta of France (Charles I's wife)
- Catherine of Braganza (Charles II's wife)
- Caroline of Brunswick (George IV's wife)

 

[VictoriaB]

Actually, the tradition is as old as the English Monarchy and certainly older than the British.
The first Queen Consort to be crowned in a separate coronation ceremony was Matilda of Flanders (wife of William the Conqueror).
The first Queen Consort to be crowned in a joint ceremony with her husband was Eleanor of Aquitaine (wife of Henry II of England).

Since Matilda of Flanders (that is, 11th century) only eight Queens Consort weren't crowned:
- Margaret of France (Edward I's second wife)
- Jane Seymour (Henry VIII's third wife)
- Anne of Cleves (Henry VIII's fourth wife)
- Catherine Howard (Henry VIII's fifth wife)
- Catherine Parr (Henry VIII's sixth wife)
- Henrietta of France (Charles I's wife)
- Catherine of Braganza (Charles II's wife)
- Caroline of Brunswick (George IV's wife)

Thank you Artemisia. Can't think why I thought the coronation of Consorts was a new development.

 

[AnnEliza]

Actually, the tradition is as old as the English Monarchy and certainly older than the British.
The first Queen Consort to be crowned in a separate coronation ceremony was Matilda of Flanders (wife of William the Conqueror).
The first Queen Consort to be crowned in a joint ceremony with her husband was Eleanor of Aquitaine (wife of Henry II of England).

Since Matilda of Flanders in 11th century only eight Queens Consort weren't crowned (and four of them were Henry VIII's wives):
- Margaret of France (Edward I's second wife)
- Jane Seymour (Henry VIII's third wife)
- Anne of Cleves (Henry VIII's fourth wife)
- Catherine Howard (Henry VIII's fifth wife)
- Catherine Parr (Henry VIII's sixth wife)
- Henrietta of France (Charles I's wife)
- Catherine of Braganza (Charles II's wife)
- Caroline of Brunswick (George IV's wife)

And I believe that in Jane Seymour's case, at least, she didn't live long enough.
I suppose with his later wives, he was running out of money, and probably regretted crowning Anne Boleyn, who was booed at the coronation.

 

[Rocketmom]

With the Queen declaring that William's child will be a prince or princess, will Kate, who is "only" a duchess, have to curtsey to her own child? I know William is a prince so he wouldn't have to, but will Kate?

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

With the Queen declaring that William's child will be a prince or princess, will Kate, who is "only" a duchess, have to curtsey to her own child? I know William is a prince so he wouldn't have to, but will Kate?

Catherine is a Princess but also a Royal Duchess and entitled to the style of HRH. She is a British princess by marriage but does not use 'Princess William' because a Royal Duchess outranks a 'mere' princess by marriage and some by blood as well/

There is no such thing as 'only' a Royal Duchess. it is one of the highest courtesy titles in all the UK.

 

[Duke-of-Earl]

Royal Styles and Titles of Great Britain

The Letters Patent of 1917 henceforth regulated the styles of Prince and Royal Highness for descendants of any sovereign of the United Kingdom.

What about individuals who were not descendants of any sovereign?

The question was raised in 1923, when the Duke of York was about to marry Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon. What would her styles be after her marriage? The day before the marriage, the king's private secretary, Lord Stamfordham, wrote to the Home Office to ask if she would become a Princess and a Royal Highness, and how she should sign her name after her marriage. He asked the same question for the eventual marriage of the Prince of Wales.

The Home Office's ceremonial secretary, Boyd, replied the same day, after consulting Garter, that by virtue of the custom that a wife takes the rank of her husband, although she would indeed become a Royal Highness, and a Princess as well ( she would not use the title any more than her husband the Duke of York), without any need for a formal document. The same answer applied, of course, to the Prince of Wales's eventual wife (HO 144/22945).

An official announcement was made in the Times of April 28, 1923:
It is officially announced that, in accordance with the settled general rule that a wife takes the status of her husband, Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon on her marriage has become Her Royal Highness the Duchess of York, with the status of a Princess.

 

[Iluvbertie]

If you look at the wives of the present men in the royal family who are Princes you have:

Elizabeth - husband - Prince Philip
Camilla - husband - Prince Charles
Catherine - husband - Prince William
Sophie - husband - Prince Edward
Birgitte - husband - Prince Richard
Katherine - husband - Prince Edward
Marie-Christine - husband - Prince Michael.

Notice anything?

The only one to use the style of Princess is the lowest ranked of those women. Why is Princess Michael called "Princess" while those ahead of her in rank are called "Duchess/Countess"? For the simple reason that Michael has no substantive title to use so his wife uses the only one available - that of a mere princess.

Looking back at Birgitte. When she married she was called 'HRH Princess Richard of Gloucester. Why - because her husband was merely "HRH Prince Richard of Gloucester". Then his father died and he was able to move into the peerage and thus his wife went from being "HRH Princess" to "HRH Duchess".

I know it is strange but in the lexicon of the royal family the title Duke - a substantive title - is superior to that of Prince and so a Duchess is senior to a Princess.

 

[branchg]

With the Queen declaring that William's child will be a prince or princess, will Kate, who is "only" a duchess, have to curtsey to her own child? I know William is a prince so he wouldn't have to, but will Kate?

No. She is HRH Princess William automatically as the wife of a male-line grandson of The Sovereign. Her husband was created a Duke, but it is a royal dukedom by virtue of the fact it is held by a Prince of the UK.

Her title is The Duchess of Cambridge, but her rank is a Princess and Royal Highness.

 

[Sister Morphine]

With the Queen declaring that William's child will be a prince or princess, will Kate, who is "only" a duchess, have to curtsey to her own child? I know William is a prince so he wouldn't have to, but will Kate?

No. Catherine curtsies to those who outrank her, such as her mother-in-law and grandmother-in-law, and her child, who would be just a prince or princess, would not qualify. Besides, she is not "only" a duchess. She is a royal princess as well as a royal duchess. She just uses her senior most title, which is The Duchess of Cambridge.

 

[padams2359]

I think the only time you will see Catherine curtsy to one of her children will be if she outlives William.

 

[vkrish]

Title of Princess Margaret after the divorce..

Hey I suddenly got this doubt yesterday. If its already discussed just lemme know.
Once she divorced the Earl of Snowdown, what was her title?
Like Diana and Sarah, was she just given the 'courtesy' title of PM,Countess of Snowdon, instead of PM, The Countess of Snowdon?
I know she retains HRH and Princess, no one can take it away from her, but what about 'The Countess of Snowdon' title..
And when the Earl remarried, did his second wife get that proper title?

 

[Lumutqueen]

Margaret was Her Royal Highness The Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon from her marriage to her death. Anthony's second wife was known as Lady Snowdon.

 

[Molly2101]

Regarding Catherine curtseying to her daughters, isn't that a yes? As blood Princesses they outrank her in the Queen's private precedence of Blood princesses outranking married Princesses. Technically Sophie's daughter Louise outranks her as a blood Princess, therefore she should in theory curtsey to her own daughter.