 |
|
04-30-2011, 06:24 PM
|
|
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Oxford, United Kingdom
Posts: 168
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel
I'm betting that the media will continue to use Princess Catherine (or Kate) no matter how often they are corrected!
That's what they did with Diana and they probably won't care if someone informs them that they got the title wrong. JMO.
|
I don't think it's inevitable. They didn't with Sarah and they don't with Sophie, they were/are pretty much always referred to correctly as Duchess of York and Countess of Wessex.
The difference with Diana was that her title did include the word Princess, so calling her 'Princess Diana' was a natural step, albeit incorrect.
|
04-30-2011, 06:47 PM
|
 |
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 135
|
|
|
Whatever the title, to me she will always be Kate Middleton !
__________________
"Hope is the thing with feathers, that perches in the soul, and sings the tune without the words, and never stops at all."
~Emily Dickinson
|
04-30-2011, 07:31 PM
|
 |
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: North Carolina, United States
Posts: 2,691
|
|
|
Doesn't that seem disrespectful, though? It sounds no different than the people who always refer to the Duchess of Cornwall as Camilla Parker-Bowles.
__________________
"The grass was greener / The light was brighter / The taste was sweeter / The nights of wonder / With friends surrounded / The dawn mist glowing / The water flowing / The endless river / Forever and ever........ "
|
04-30-2011, 07:35 PM
|
 |
Gentry
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Columbus, Ohio, United States
Posts: 92
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel
You're right of course, but I'm betting that the media will continue to use Princess Catherine (or Kate) no matter how often they are corrected!
That's what they did with Diana and they probably won't care if someone informs them that they got the title wrong. JMO.
|
The editors of this photo journal, which is fantastic, btw, have it all wrong. They keep referring to the couple as "Prince William and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge." Perhaps they were confused by "the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall."
Royal Wedding Ceremony (photos) | OregonLive.com
|
05-02-2011, 01:40 PM
|
|
Commoner
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Binghamton, United States
Posts: 10
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Morphine
Charles can't create her Princess Catherine of Wales because the "of Wales" denotes the son/daughter of the PoW, and when Charles is King, he will no longer be The Prince of Wales.
|
SM I am wondering if Charles when he becomes King or even QE2 can give Catherine a title like:
HRH Catherine, Princess of Wales or HRH Catherine Cambridge Princess of Cambridge... or HRH Catherine, Princess Mountbatten Windsor.
|
05-02-2011, 04:07 PM
|
|
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: North Carolina, United States
Posts: 2,691
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by abbra
SM I am wondering if Charles when he becomes King or even QE2 can give Catherine a title like:
HRH Catherine, Princess of Wales or HRH Catherine Cambridge Princess of Cambridge... or HRH Catherine, Princess Mountbatten Windsor.
|
None of those titles make any sense. "Catherine, Princess of Wales" is what her title would be if she divorced William sometime after his creation as Prince of Wales. She would lose the HRH automatically. "Catherine Cambridge, Princess of Cambridge" doesn't even exist. She is not a Princess of Cambridge, she's The Duchess of Cambridge, which is a big difference. There is no such thing as a "Princess of Cambridge" anyway, and her surname is not Cambridge; she no longer has a surname. There is no such thing as "Princess Mountbatten-Windsor" either, as Mountbatten-Windsor is not a place, but rather the surname used by the Queen's descendants who don't have a princely status.
Also, "First name, Title" is the style that divorced women use. Why would Catherine use the style of a divorced woman if she isn't one?
__________________
"The grass was greener / The light was brighter / The taste was sweeter / The nights of wonder / With friends surrounded / The dawn mist glowing / The water flowing / The endless river / Forever and ever........ "
|
05-05-2011, 11:37 AM
|
|
Commoner
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Binghamton, United States
Posts: 10
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Morphine
None of those titles make any sense. "Catherine, Princess of Wales" is what her title would be if she divorced William sometime after his creation as Prince of Wales. She would lose the HRH automatically. "Catherine Cambridge, Princess of Cambridge" doesn't even exist. She is not a Princess of Cambridge, she's The Duchess of Cambridge, which is a big difference. There is no such thing as a "Princess of Cambridge" anyway, and her surname is not Cambridge; she no longer has a surname. There is no such thing as "Princess Mountbatten-Windsor" either, as Mountbatten-Windsor is not a place, but rather the surname used by the Queen's descendants who don't have a princely status.
Also, "First name, Title" is the style that divorced women use. Why would Catherine use the style of a divorced woman if she isn't one?
|
Thanks for the explanation...
|
06-07-2011, 07:42 AM
|
 |
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,661
|
|
|
We say for all bride's gowns :
Something new : Her earrings
Something old : Diana's ring
Something blu : Diana's ring
Someting borrowed The tiara
Is that correct for Catherin's dress????
|
06-22-2011, 10:27 PM
|
 |
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 1,891
|
|
|
NOPE
The earrings were knew
The tiara was borrowed
The blue was apparently something we couldn't see, and I don't know what the old was.
As for what to call her, I'm calling her Princess Catherine because a) she's married to a prince b) Diana was called Princess Diana so Kate can get the same treatment.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
|
06-23-2011, 08:38 AM
|
 |
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,844
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fandesacs2003
We say for all bride's gowns :
Something new : Her earrings
Something old : Diana's ring
Something blu : Diana's ring
Someting borrowed The tiara
Is that correct for Catherin's dress????
|
Almost.....earrings new, something borrowed was the tiara, blue she had a blue ribbon tied into the skirt of her dress and old she had some lace designed into her dress that was old.....
|
06-23-2011, 09:57 AM
|
 |
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 2,596
|
|
|
Did Kate have a sixpence in her shoe?
|
06-23-2011, 01:29 PM
|
|
Courtier
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Close to The Hague, Netherlands
Posts: 744
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi
NOPE
The earrings were knew
The tiara was borrowed
The blue was apparently something we couldn't see, and I don't know what the old was.
As for what to call her, I'm calling her Princess Catherine because a) she's married to a prince b) Diana was called Princess Diana so Kate can get the same treatment.
|
That was all wrong and will always be wrong. Diana was not Princess Diana - she was Diana, Princess of Wales. Diana was not born a Princess, therefore had no Princess title of her own.
|
06-23-2011, 06:54 PM
|
 |
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 2,658
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippy
That was all wrong and will always be wrong. Diana was not Princess Diana - she was Diana, Princess of Wales. Diana was not born a Princess, therefore had no Princess title of her own.
|
Yeppers and to add to this... if one called Diana "Princess Diana" to her face either before or after her divorce, she would have corrected them too!
|
06-23-2011, 10:09 PM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 4,947
|
|
|
The blue was a tiny blue bow sewn onto the dress somewhere. I'm thinking of the waist for some reason.
|
07-16-2011, 03:51 PM
|
|
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,500
|
|
|
I will always refer to her as Kate - as in "Wills and Kate".
|
07-20-2011, 08:17 PM
|
|
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 1,891
|
|
|
Couldn't her "something blue" have been her wedding ring?
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
|
10-01-2011, 12:54 PM
|
 |
Serene Highness
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cambridge, United States
Posts: 1,273
|
|
|
April 29,2011
The Royal Wedding
Westminster Abbey
William & Kate
Something new - the wedding dress
Something borrowed - the halo tiara
Something blue - the engagement ring
I watched it live from the US and it was beautiful and she looked radiant on her wedding day:)
__________________
" An ugly baby is a very nasty object, and the prettiest is frightful when undressed."
- Queen Victoria
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
Chevy Camaro Forum
Ford Mustang Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum
Volkswagen Touareg Forum
Land Rover Defender Forum
