Will Princess Charlotte of Cambridge get the Princess Royal title?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Westfield Bakery

Aristocracy
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
204
City
Westfield, New Jersey
Country
United States
William, Duke of Cambridge's daughter, Charlotte, will be a very important Royal when her father becomes King William V. Will the Princess of Cambridge receive the title of Princess Royal, as her great-aunt, Princess Anne, Princess Royal?
 
I don't see why not? It's possible that Charlotte could end up as de jure duchess of York if the BRF adopt the Swedish practice of granting duches to all royal children and grandchildren.
 
If she wasn't made Princess Royal she would be the first person eligible to receive the title to not in 300 years.
 
The only reason she won't, is if Anne is still alive when Charles dies. Anne will hold the title till she dies.

Charlotte as it stands is one of two kids of William V in the future. Unlike Elizabeth, there aren't cousins and extra family.

I would be surprised if she isn't given her own title on marriage. With the change in succession laws, how peerages are appointed and inherited is likely to change. Like Harry and his future dude will be expected to work, especially when Georgr is young, Charlotte will be the same. Until George has kids and they are adults and ready to work, she will be backup to George. Seems right she have a title of her own, reflecting the changes.
 
The only reason she won't, is if Anne is still alive when Charles dies. Anne will hold the title till she dies.

Charlotte as it stands is one of two kids of William V in the future. Unlike Elizabeth, there aren't cousins and extra family.

I would be surprised if she isn't given her own title on marriage. With the change in succession laws, how peerages are appointed and inherited is likely to change. Like Harry and his future dude will be expected to work, especially when Georgr is young, Charlotte will be the same. Until George has kids and they are adults and ready to work, she will be backup to George. Seems right she have a title of her own, reflecting the changes.

She could be like her grandaunt in 1973 and decline a title. Anne didn't want a title for her husband, Mark Phillips or her children.
 
It must be remembered that Anne has to die for this title to be available again. It maybe that William will give it to his daughter if Anne dies during or before his reign but if she outlives him then Charlotte won't be eligible for that title. In the normal course of events she would do so but that isn't a given.

As for giving Charlotte a title in her own right - such as Duchess of York - that would go against tradition.

It is more likely that gender blind succession to titles would be introduced and thus Beatrice would inherit the title rather than it is recreated for Charlotte.
 
:previous: Gender blind succession against tradition as well :ermm: It wouldn't be the first for either.

It makes sense. Sorry, but if you are going to make the throne and peerages equal inheritance, then it's ridiculous not to give peerages to women. If a woman in parliament can be made a baroness, a princess surely can be made a duchess.

But not York. I am all for Bea being given it.

I actually think she should be Duchess of Cambridge. When her father becomes king, the title merges with the crown. George won't need it, he will be Prince of Wales. It would be fitting for Cambridge to be remade for Charlotte on her wedding, since she will grow up with it as her designation.
 
It must be remembered that Anne has to die for this title to be available again. It maybe that William will give it to his daughter if Anne dies during or before his reign but if she outlives him then Charlotte won't be eligible for that title. In the normal course of events she would do so but that isn't a given.

As for giving Charlotte a title in her own right - such as Duchess of York - that would go against tradition.

It is more likely that gender blind succession to titles would be introduced and thus Beatrice would inherit the title rather than it is recreated for Charlotte.

Beatrice can't inherit the York dukedom as the letters patent issued to Andrew in 1986 won't allow that. B could be granted it as a new creation when Andrew dies but given that she will probably be not wanted (rightly or wrongly) as a working royal, I don't see this
Happening.
 
Currently Beatrice can't inherit the York title sure ... but there have been a number of attempts to allow for gender blind inheritance of titles - that is my point - that is that happens then Beatrice would be the heir to the York title.

The Queen could also issue new LPs - to allow for gender blind inheritance, for Beatrice alone to inherit or for 'in lieu of heirs male, heirs female'.

I suspect though that the argument for first born to inherit all titles has more chance of getting through the Houses of Parliament as a law than the Queen issuing new LPs.
 
Currently Beatrice can't inherit the York title sure ... but there have been a number of attempts to allow for gender blind inheritance of titles - that is my point - that is that happens then Beatrice would be the heir to the York title.

The Queen could also issue new LPs - to allow for gender blind inheritance, for Beatrice alone to inherit or for 'in lieu of heirs male, heirs female'.

I suspect though that the argument for first born to inherit all titles has more chance of getting through the Houses of Parliament as a law than the Queen issuing new LPs.

Beatrice will probably loose her titles when/if she marries and I don't think Charles would want to alter the letters patent so she could inherit it from Andrew, sadly.

The RF have already 'lost' the Kent and Gloucester Dukedoms, and they will need to be careful with the Edinburgh one once Edward and then James Severen inherits it. That's under the current rules. I assume the Swedish ones revert to the crown once the holder dies, but given that three dukedoms are in effect leaving the crown under male primogeniture, how many more would basically become new ducal families once they loose the right to the style HRH after 3 generations? The letters patent would need to stare its for the bearers lifetime instead. If Scotland does go through with indyref 2 than there'll be one less kingdom for supplying Dukedoms... can't be too careful about these things...

So the suggestion of Charlotte being duchess of Cambridge would help conserve the precious supply of dukedoms but like the poster above, be a nice tribute to William. But its more likely that it will be Princess Royal as its not hereditary and trad the title of the only/first daughter of the monarch.
 
Last edited:
I am not talking about only royal dukedoms but all hereditary titles. There are people who regularly put forward suggestions, and actual legislation, to move that to gender blind succession. If that law ever gets past it won't be down to Charles to try to exempt the York dukedom as it would be the law of the land (and would also see Louise inherit her father's titles over James if true gender blind and not just male preference with females able to inherit with no sons come into being).

I never suggested Charles would issue new LPs for Andrew but the Queen. Given the clear dislike between Charles and Andrew it would be inconceivable for Charles to do anything for Andrew and his daughters. If the girls aren't married before Charles becomes King I don't even seeing them marrying in a royal chapel as I doubt Charles would give his consent for even a St Georges wedding for either of them and I suspect he wouldn't attend anyway given his own clear hatred of Sarah.

If Charles is serious about reducing the size of the royal family then he can't strip Beatrice and Eugenie of their styles and then turn around and approve titles and styles for Harry's kids (he probably would but it would show him in a very bad light as one whose dislike of a younger brother is determining policy rather than fairness).
 
Queen Elizabeth II waited until 22 years after Princess Mary's death to grant the title of Princess Royal to Anne. Princess Anne was 37 when she became Princess Royal. I've wondered why the Queen waited so long to give the title to Anne. One theory I have is that she was waiting to see if Charles had a daughter and if he did to keep the title open for him to give to his daughter.
Anne is currently in her late 60s and will presumably live another 30+ years. Assuming William outlives both his father and his Aunt then I would predict that as King, William would bestow the title of Princess Royal on Charlotte, his eldest daughter, most likely when she is in her late 30s.
However, if Charlotte's not interested in Royal duties and George has a daughter of his own by then, it's possible they might skip a generation to leave the title open for George's eldest daughter (assuming she has an elder brother and is not destined to become Queen.)
 
I am not talking about only royal dukedoms but all hereditary titles. There are people who regularly put forward suggestions, and actual legislation, to move that to gender blind succession. If that law ever gets past it won't be down to Charles to try to exempt the York dukedom as it would be the law of the land (and would also see Louise inherit her father's titles over James if true gender blind and not just male preference with females able to inherit with no sons come into being).

I never suggested Charles would issue new LPs for Andrew but the Queen. Given the clear dislike between Charles and Andrew it would be inconceivable for Charles to do anything for Andrew and his daughters. If the girls aren't married before Charles becomes King I don't even seeing them marrying in a royal chapel as I doubt Charles would give his consent for even a St Georges wedding for either of them and I suspect he wouldn't attend anyway given his own clear hatred of Sarah.

If Charles is serious about reducing the size of the royal family then he can't strip Beatrice and Eugenie of their styles and then turn around and approve titles and styles for Harry's kids (he probably would but it would show him in a very bad light as one whose dislike of a younger brother is determining policy rather than fairness).

I was working from the assumption that any possible law changes would not be retroactive, so it would only apply to inheritances after the law was changed. I should have been more clear about that Iluvbertie, my apologies.
 
Beatrice will probably loose her titles when/if she marries and I don't think Charles would want to alter the letters patent so she could inherit it from Andrew, sadly.

If he wants to resign from the title "Defender of the Faith" so why he couldn't try to change the letters' patent?

The RF have already 'lost' the Kent and Gloucester Dukedoms, and they will need to be careful with the Edinburgh one once Edward and then James Severen inherits it.

In what sense they "lost"? Everyone of the Dukes has a son:
George will inherit the title of the Duke of Kent and his only son Edward will become the Earl of St. Andrews.
Alexander will inherit the title of the Duke of Gloucester and his only son, also Alexander, will become the Earl of Ulster.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I'm not mistaken, when the titles of Duke of Kent and Duke of Gloucester are passed on, they will cease to be royal dukedoms but remain a peerage.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here.
 
Beatrice will probably loose her titles when/if she marries and I don't think Charles would want to alter the letters patent so she could inherit it from Andrew, sadly.

Beatrice will not "lose" her title, she'll simply drop her territorial designation.

She'll go from being HRH Princess Beatrice of York to HRH Princess Beatrice, Mrs. John Doe.

For reference, look at what happened to Princess Alexandra.

Even Anne, Margaret, the Queen, Mary (daughter of George V), Louise (daughter of Edward VII), and Louise (daughter of Victoria), went through similar title changes when they married.


In what sense they "lost"? Everyone of the Dukes has a son:
George will inherit the title of the Duke of Kent and his only son Edward will become the Earl of St. Andrews.
Alexander will inherit the title of the Duke of Gloucester and his only son, also Alexander, will become the Earl of Ulster.


They've been "lost" in the sense that when the current Dukes die, the titles will cease to be royal.
 
And that is very sad in a way, as the Dukedom of Gloucester has been used within the BRF (albeit on successive creations) since medieval times.
 
In what sense they "lost"? Everyone of the Dukes has a son:
George will inherit the title of the Duke of Kent and his only son Edward will become the Earl of St. Andrews.
Alexander will inherit the title of the Duke of Gloucester and his only son, also Alexander, will become the Earl of Ulster.

The Earls of Ulster and St Andrews won't be HRH's like their fathers, they will be Their Grace's and will be peers not members of the royal house. It also means that those particular set of titles can't be given to the next generation of royal children as unlike those granted to the eldest son/daughter of the monarch, they do not revert to the crown until the last lineal heirs die i.e no heirs male or female, so thing that will be even more likely with absolute primogeniture. This means that every generation (barring the possibility that Prince George has only one child) will mean new ducal families, and less usable titles, as you can't use titles that are already held by other families. Whether this is a bad thing or not is hard to say. The remaining dukedoms I can think of are Sussex and Clarence. Sussex is being earmarked for Harry AFAIK. Cumberland and Albany both technically belong to the Hannover and Coburg families (cf the 1917 titles depravation act) and thus are also excluded from the possible list of royal dukedoms. It's possible that the tradition of royal dukes could be dispensed with as part of slimming down the monarchy but given that those models of royal efficiency the Swedes still use them I don't see that happening.

And that is very sad in a way, as the Dukedom of Gloucester has been used within the BRF (albeit on successive creations) since medieval times.

Same for the York dukedom. It was even a dynasty in its own right at one time - the Yorkists in the Wars of the Roses. After that it always reverted to the crown as either its bearer became king (Edward IV, Henry VIII, Charles I, James II, George V, George VI) or died without children (Richard son of Edward IV - one of the princes of the tower, Prince Ernest Augustus of Hannover, prince-bishop of Onasbruck - brother of George I, Prince Edward, son of Frederick Prince of Wales, Prince Frederick son of George III, and Henry Benedict Stuart [Jacobite] Cardinal- Duke of York come to think of it). Andrew is the first case where it is due to not having a son.
 
Last edited:
I agree, they really should allow gender blind inheritance of title, but I think in the interest of decreasing titles for peripheral members of the RF they should make it so it would be in affect for the children of The Duke of Cambridge and The Duke of Sussex. It is too messy to try and do it retroactively.

I would love to see them have females be Duchesses in their own right (a la the Swedish Royal Family) but I think that Louis should become the Duke of Cambridge and Charlotte should become the Princess Royal.

If Harry's first born is a girl I think she should be the first to inherit her father's title.
 
William, Duke of Cambridge's daughter, Charlotte, will be a very important Royal when her father becomes King William V. Will the Princess of Cambridge receive the title of Princess Royal, as her great-aunt, Princess Anne, Princess Royal?

As the eldest daughter of the King, she probably will, but not as long as Anne is alive as there can only be one Princess Royal at a time.

I agree, they really should allow gender blind inheritance of title, but I think in the interest of decreasing titles for peripheral members of the RF they should make it so it would be in affect for the children of The Duke of Cambridge and The Duke of Sussex. It is too messy to try and do it retroactively.

I would love to see them have females be Duchesses in their own right (a la the Swedish Royal Family) but I think that Louis should become the Duke of Cambridge and Charlotte should become the Princess Royal.

If Harry's first born is a girl I think she should be the first to inherit her father's title.
.

The Swedish duchies are different because they are not hereditary.. The titles of nobility of the Spanish Royal House like Duchess of Lugo , Duchess of Palma de Mallorca, Duchess of Badajoz, or Duchess of Soría aren’t hereditary either. I don’t see the reason why hereditary peerages should be created for princes of the UK and then linger for generations outside the Royal Family properly.

If I'm not mistaken, when the titles of Duke of Kent and Duke of Gloucester are passed on, they will cease to be royal dukedoms but remain a peerage.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here.

You are right. The Earl of Ulster and the Earl of St Andrews will be His Grace The Duke of Gloucester and His Grace The Duke of Kent,. The titles will leave the Royal Family and go on until they become extinct, which was my point exactly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If Louis or any other younger sons of William are given a peerage, such as Duke, then I think Charlotte should be given one too.

Princess Royal is a style, not a title (peerage), so it wouldn't be the same.

alt.talk.royalty FAQ: British royalty and nobility

Yes, it would be the end of a 300-year old tradition but the now discarded male-preference succession to the Crown was an even older tradition.

But I also agree with Mbruno: "I don’t see the reason why hereditary peerages should be created for princes of the UK and then linger for generations outside the Royal Family properly."

William can give peerage titles to all of his children, sons and daughters, but make them non-hereditary.
 
If Louis or any other younger sons of William are given a peerage, such as Duke, then I think Charlotte should be given one too.

Princess Royal is a style, not a title (peerage), so it wouldn't be the same.

alt.talk.royalty FAQ: British royalty and nobility

Yes, it would be the end of a 300-year old tradition but the now discarded male-preference succession to the Crown was an even older tradition.

But I also agree with Mbruno: "I don’t see the reason why hereditary peerages should be created for princes of the UK and then linger for generations outside the Royal Family properly."

William can give peerage titles to all of his children, sons and daughters, but make them non-hereditary.

This may be the perfect generation to make the switch to non-hereditary. Assuming no law changes impact Beatrice, the Duke of York title will not be passed on. If Charles makes Edward the Duke of Edinburg, as suggested, he could make that non-hereditary. James would still become an Earl. Assuming William outlives Charles, the Duke of Cambridge title merges with the crown. That would just leave Harry’s new title as possibly being hereditary and maybe the LP’s for that could be changed before he has children.
 
If Princess Anne dies during the reign of her nephew King William V, is there a written law of how soon he can give the title of Princess Royal to Charlotte?
 
If Princess Anne dies during the reign of her nephew King William V, is there a written law of how soon he can give the title of Princess Royal to Charlotte?

No, its conferred at the discretion of the reigning sovereign. William could give it to Charlotte the day of Anne's death, a week or a year or ten or twenty years later, etc., or never.
 
If Princess Anne dies during the reign of her nephew King William V, is there a written law of how soon he can give the title of Princess Royal to Charlotte?

No. There is no rule about when or if the title is given.

Historical precedence:
-Anne received it in 1987- Mary, Countess Harewood died in 1965. (22 years)
-Mary received it in 1932- Louise died January 4, 1931 (3 days short of 1 year anniversary of Louise's death, Mary got the title on January 1 1932)
-Louise received it in 1905- Victoria (German empress) died in 1901 (4 years)
-Victoria received it in 1841- Charlotte (queen of Wurtemberg) died in 1828 (13 years)
-Charlotte received it in 1789- Anne (princess or orange) died in 1759 (30 years)
-Anne got it in 1727- Louisa Maria had died in 1712 (15 years)
-Louise Maria got it in 1692- Mary had died in 1660 (32 years)
-Mary- was the first and was bestowed the title in 1642 at age 11


The longer waits often had to do with no one to fill the role.
-Charlotte died 12 years before Queen Victoria had her first daughter. Victoria later bestowed the title upon her 1 year old daughter.
-When Anne of Orange died, there was no one to fill the title. Charlotte was born 8 years later. Charlotte's father waited till she was 22 to give her it.
-Anne was only 3 when Louise Maria died. She was given the title at the age of 18


Mary and Louisa Maria got it at birth. It was the tradition from the French court that they adopted, that the eldest daughter of the sovereign, was Princess Royal. Louisa Maria though it wasn't common to use it for her, it fell out of fashion between Mary and Anne.


It really depends on when Anne dies really. If Charlotte is an adult, and a full working royal when Anne dies, it may only be a few years before she is given the title. Or they may choose to wait as done with Anne.
 
As stated above I believe that bestowing the style 'Princess Royal' on Princess Charlotte will happen at a suitable time and in a suitable manner. As to equal primogeniture for the aristocracy, I believe there is a very thick brick wall as to that notion.

The rules on the royal succession have changed for the crown. It is very notable that not only did that not also apply to the aristocracy, but male entail remains, thereby rendering widows and daughters homeless . . . still!
 
Last edited:
If Princess Anne dies during the reign of her nephew King William V, is there a written law of how soon he can give the title of Princess Royal to Charlotte?

No. He could do it that same day or wait 20+ years. It is the same with how long the King waits to create his heir apparent Prince of Wales - totally at the discretion of the monarch of the day.
 
If Princess Anne dies during the reign of her nephew King William V, is there a written law of how soon he can give the title of Princess Royal to Charlotte?

No, and strictly-speaking I don't think there's even a law requiring that titles be unique (there are two different earldoms of Mar, for example). There could be a dozen Princesses Royal and, though it would be silly, it would be perfectly lawful.
 
Last edited:
No. There is no rule about when or if the title is given.

Historical precedence:
-Anne received it in 1987- Mary, Countess Harewood died in 1965. (22 years)
-Mary received it in 1932- Louise died January 4, 1931 (3 days short of 1 year anniversary of Louise's death, Mary got the title on January 1 1932)
-Louise received it in 1905- Victoria (German empress) died in 1901 (4 years)
-Victoria received it in 1841- Charlotte (queen of Wurtemberg) died in 1828 (13 years)
-Charlotte received it in 1789- Anne (princess or orange) died in 1759 (30 years)
-Anne got it in 1727- Louisa Maria had died in 1712 (15 years)
-Louise Maria got it in 1692- Mary had died in 1660 (32 years)
-Mary- was the first and was bestowed the title in 1642 at age 11


The longer waits often had to do with no one to fill the role.
-Charlotte died 12 years before Queen Victoria had her first daughter. Victoria later bestowed the title upon her 1 year old daughter.
-When Anne of Orange died, there was no one to fill the title. Charlotte was born 8 years later. Charlotte's father waited till she was 22 to give her it.
-Anne was only 3 when Louise Maria died. She was given the title at the age of 18


Mary and Louisa Maria got it at birth. It was the tradition from the French court that they adopted, that the eldest daughter of the sovereign, was Princess Royal. Louisa Maria though it wasn't common to use it for her, it fell out of fashion between Mary and Anne.


It really depends on when Anne dies really. If Charlotte is an adult, and a full working royal when Anne dies, it may only be a few years before she is given the title. Or they may choose to wait as done with Anne.

Louisa Maria was never Princess Royal. Her father James II/VII lost his throne in 1688, four years before she was born, although he continued to claim the throne (and the right to grant styles and titles).

Charlotte was called Princess Royal from birth but wasn't officially granted the style until 1789.

This website contains details about the seven princesses who have held the style Princess Royal:

alt.talk.royalty FAQ: British royalty and nobility
 
Yes, Princess Charlotte will be the next Princess Royal in her father’s reign.
 
Back
Top Bottom