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
 
  #1721  
Old 12-09-2012, 10:32 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: small town, United States
Posts: 9
Thank you, I just picked this up from wikipedia,
"Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark, husband of Elizabeth II, already raised to the peerage as Duke of Edinburgh in 1947, was made a Prince of the United Kingdom in 1957. He is not styled as Prince Consort."

more from wikipedia,

Prince Consort (capitalized) is a formal title. Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha is the only spouse of a British queen to have held it: it was awarded to him in 1857 by his wife, Queen Victoria (reigned 1837–1901). In 2005 Prince Henrik, the spouse of Margrethe II of Denmark, was awarded the same title.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1722  
Old 12-09-2012, 10:33 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Philip was always HRH The Duke of Edinburgh before he became HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. After the accession he enjoyed place and precedence next to HM so being made a Prince of the UK made no real difference in his status and how he was treated. Even without the official title the public frequently referred to him as Prince Philip anyway.
Alberts role was I think more difficult. He was HRH Prince Albert after his marriage but it was a number of years before Victoria got around to making him The Prince Consort but never a Prince of GB & I. He was never given a peerage.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1723  
Old 12-09-2012, 10:47 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle View Post
Consort question: While Elizabeth was Queen, there were years before Philip was made a prince of the United Kingdom where he was HRH the Duke of Edinburogh. How was he referred to as a consort during that time? Prince Albert was Prince Corsort as well, but he was a prince in his one right. Prince Philip had delinquished his prince title before marriage to Elizabeth. I'm just curious...
I think when you marry a princess, you technically become a prince, so he became a prince when he wed. But as the Duke of Edinburgh and the Duchess of Cornwall have shown - sometimes another moniker is their preference.

Some of the websites I have visited have explained that to be named a Duke one ups being called a Prince, because in the first case you are "using" your spouse's titles and in the second case you carry your own title and the duties that your "Duchy" depends upon. The same goes for "Princess" and "Duchess."

I guess, I would be unbelievably proud to be named the Duchess of Edinburgh. It is a great city with great seats of learning and the arts. It was a center of "Scots Renaissance" while Robbie Burns lived! It is a lively city of sport and commerce. The Duke has made a life work of improving the city and its various constituencies. He loves the place and they love him for it. I say it is a lovely match!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1724  
Old 12-09-2012, 11:05 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
Each country is different but in Britain the husband doesn't take the styles and titles of his wife so when Philip married Elizabeth he didn't become a Prince, anymore than Mark Philips, Tim Lawrence, The Earl of Harewood, Lord Snowdon or Angus Ogilvy became Princes when they married their princesses.

Philip gave up being a Prince of Greece and Denmark and it was then incorrect to call him a Prince until 1957 - although many people did.

To be a Prince in the UK one has to be born a Prince or created a Prince not marry a Princess - whereas to become a Princess one has only to marry a Prince, as well as be born a Princess or be created a Princess.

With Philip there is also the story of his name being written in the game book at either Balmoral or Sandringham as Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh and George VI crossing out the word 'Prince' as Philip wasn't a Prince after 1947 until 1957.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1725  
Old 12-09-2012, 11:34 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: small town, United States
Posts: 9
I mistakenly thought Philip was the Prince Consort. I was looking at it in relation to Camilla being Princess Consort. I thought maybe they were looking at that as a precident.

When that announcement was made at Charles and Camelia's wedding about Princess Consort, my thought was that there would only be Queen regents from now on. I think it is a good idea, since it is possible that William's daughter could be a queen regent. It would set "queen" apart and make it only by birth.

I know I have no say in it, but it was my first thought.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1726  
Old 12-10-2012, 02:04 AM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
There is a difference between a prince consort (husband of a Queen Regnant) and The Prince Consort - an official and independent title that has only been created once in British history (for Prince Albert). Prince Philip is a prince consort but he is not The Prince Consort.

In regards to the title of wives of future Monarchs, if Commonwealth Realms pass Acts of Parliament is passed whereby all spouses of future Sovereigns are to be known as The Prince/Princess Consort, I will be fine with that. After all, the Dutch did something pretty similar (although Maxima will still be a Queen). But to deprive only one woman - Camilla - of a title and style that should rightfully be hers as soon as Charles ascends to the Throne is not only wrong, it would create a dangerous precedent and would turn Monarchy into some sort of a popularity contest.
Reply With Quote
  #1727  
Old 12-10-2012, 02:30 AM
AnnEliza's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle, United States
Posts: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmirerUS View Post
I think when you marry a princess, you technically become a prince, so he became a prince when he wed.
I don't see how that can be right. Neither of Princess Anne's husbands became a prince upon marrying her.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle View Post
...my thought was that there would only be Queen regents from now on. I think it is a good idea, since it is possible that William's daughter could be a queen regent. It would set "queen" apart and make it only by birth.
There is a regent only if the monarch is a minor. For example, if a king died and his oldest child was say 10 years old, a regent could be appointed to act in the child monarch's name, and the regent could be the widowed queen, the child's mother. That's the only way you could have a queen regent.

Or do you mean a queen regnant, like the present Queen, as opposed to a Queen Consort?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1728  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:00 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
I have question. Can Harry if he wanted to verbally renounce his titles as Prince Philip did and would it be legal?

Can Harry just wake up tomorrow and quit being a prince or is there more to it than this?
Again it appears Phillip just 'quit' being a prince.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1729  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:06 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Harry could voluntarily choose not to use his royal styles, just as his cousins James and Louise Wessex are not using theirs. But legally, he would remain HRH Prince Henry of Wales because the 1917 Letters Patent states he is automatically entitled to it at birth, just as Louise and James are.

The Queen would technically have to issue a Royal Warrant, but if she chose not to, he would be "Lord Henry Mountbatten-Windsor" as the son of a Duke.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1730  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:09 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
I have question. Can Harry if he wanted to verbally renounce his titles as Prince Philip did and would it be legal?
Can Harry just wake up tomorrow and quit being a prince or is there more to it than this?
If Prince Harry made a verbal declaration through St James Palace, Clarence House and/or Buckingham Palace officially declining the honour of being a British Prince, along with the style of Royal Highness, then I am pretty certain there wouldn't be major obstacles. it has, after all worked for Viscount Severn and Lady Louise; legally born a British Prince and Princess, their status was "changed" to that of children of a Peer by a mere proclamation.

In order for Harry to officially cease to become a British Prince, the Sovereign would need to issue Letters Patent or Royal Proclamation to that effect.
Reply With Quote
  #1731  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:51 PM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 2,039
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1732  
Old 12-12-2012, 03:54 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHHermione View Post
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.
Obviously, if it were to happen, it would have been a major issue. Harry is considered to be one of the core members of the Royal Family, current and future.
However, once the decision were made and all it took was an announcement, the manner in which the renouncement was made would hardly matter.
Reply With Quote
  #1733  
Old 12-12-2012, 04:03 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHHermione View Post
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1734  
Old 12-13-2012, 08:52 PM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,399
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
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #1735  
Old 12-14-2012, 07:33 AM
kbk kbk is offline
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toruń, Poland
Posts: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1736  
Old 12-14-2012, 07:40 AM
DukeOfAster's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pembroke, United States
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbk View Post
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1737  
Old 12-14-2012, 01:03 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbk View Post
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).
Reply With Quote
  #1738  
Old 12-15-2012, 03:07 AM
AnnEliza's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle, United States
Posts: 325
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #1739  
Old 12-15-2012, 04:12 AM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnEliza View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #1740  
Old 12-15-2012, 05:40 PM
padams2359's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 388
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.
__________________

__________________
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
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess Prince Harry and Prince William 1110 07-12-2014 10:00 PM
Questions About [non-British] Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 717 05-17-2014 05:44 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
abdication birth charlene crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman picture of the month poland pom president hollande prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen anne-marie 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 10:24 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]