Harry and Chelsy: Relationship Musings

[Melibea]

I think that his daughters will be princesses on their own right like Beatrice and Eugenie.
And I have a question, Harry will only be a prince until the Duke of York dies?

 

[Sister Morphine]

Why change the inheritance laws to the monarchy which are even older?

I think it unfair that woman can't inherit their father's titles.

Do you really think they will wait another 40 years to create Harry Duke of York by which time William will probably have his own second son. William would more likely keep it for that second son. In addition Harry might already have a son of his own meaning that the title would eventually be unroyal - like the Kent and Gloucester titles will be with the next holder of each title.

Just because I said I couldn't see it happening doesn't mean I think it shouldn't.

As I said, it's tradition for the elder brother of the King to be Duke of York. If Harry is made Duke of York, when he dies it will revert to the crown and William (if still alive) can create a new Duke of York for one of his sons. If William's eldest child is on the throne by then, they can do it. I can't see them breaking with that, even if they have to wait 40 years. The reason there is such a lag time is that people marry later in life now than they did then, so you have people living longer and marrying later, which creates gaps like this.

 

[royalsmartie]

I think that his daughters will be princesses on their own right like Beatrice and Eugenie.
And I have a question, Harry will only be a prince until the Duke of York dies?

thats the question we were trying to answer he maybe a prince into charles steps on the throne or when he gets married

 

[royalsmartie]

Just because I said I couldn't see it happening doesn't mean I think it shouldn't.

As I said, it's tradition for the elder brother of the King to be Duke of York. If Harry is made Duke of York, when he dies it will revert to the crown and William (if still alive) can create a new Duke of York for one of his sons. If William's eldest child is on the throne by then, they can do it. I can't see them breaking with that, even if they have to wait 40 years. The reason there is such a lag time is that people marry later in life now than they did then, so you have people living longer and marrying later, which creates gaps like this.

I agree a about the gap.40 yrs ago we didn't have this problem

 

[Sister Morphine]

I think that his daughters will be princesses on their own right like Beatrice and Eugenie.
And I have a question, Harry will only be a prince until the Duke of York dies?

No, he'll probably be Prince Harry of Wales, Duke of ______ when he marries and then if the title is available for him, either during his father's kingship or his brother's, he'll be The Prince Henry, Duke of ______ and York. Which would make his children HRH Prince/Princess _______ of ______ and York.


That's how I see it playing out, anyway.

 

[Melibea]

Thanks for the info. The titles for the british royal family are a bit complicated.

 

[Sister Morphine]

They can be. Because grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line are afforded the HRH style and the title Prince/Princess of Great Britain, any children Harry has will be styled as such. He could choose to do something similar to what Edward did and have his children styled differently, but being the only other son of Charles, he may opt not to do that.

 

[Sister Morphine]

For example, when George V married Mary of Teck, he was created Duke of York by his grandmother. Before then, he was merely Prince George of Wales. When his grandmother died, he became the Duke of Cornwall upon his father's accession to the throne. Then he became The Prince George, Duke of Cornwall and York.

So there is precedence for a royal prince holding two ducal titles at once.

 

[Melibea]

I think that right now I have a headache

In my country is so much simple, but I prefer the british way much more interesting. Thank you for all the info

 

[Sister Morphine]

Well in my country it's even simpler than that!


I'm huge nerd for this kind of thing, which is why I read Wikipedia all the time about it.

 

[Melibea]

I didn't notice you were not from UK!
In my country the only interesting thing is that we have infantas instead of princesses. I will have to read more about the titles of the BRF.

 

[Zonk]

Let's get back on topic, which is musings of Harry and Chelsy.

All future posts regarding Harry's title should be posted http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...william-harry-wives-and-children-6755-28.html .

Thank you.

Zonk
British Forums Moderator

 

[Opal]

Exactly, after all the Queens done to stop showing her money, she won't want William and Harry showing it off too. Thats why I think they've been scalling down there club outings.

I think it has more to do with the fact that they have calmed down and matured. Their priorities appear to be different now and they are concentrating on their training.

I don't think harry or wills will have a low key wedding the 1st time anyway

Are you suggesting they'll have more than one wedding/marriage?

I like that Chelsy is a private person and doesn't play to the press. I'm liking Chelsy more and more.

I like this about her as well.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Infanta is the title of the daughter of a monarch, right? The distinction in the UK is that the daughter of a monarch is referred to as The Princess Whoever (as in the case of The Princess Anne, before she became known as The Princess Royal), whereas the daughter of a prince, such as Princess Beatrice, is called simply Princess Whoever. If Andrew ever became King--which is highly unlikely--then Beatrice and Eugenie would become The Princess Beatrice and The Princess Eugenie.

I didn't notice you were not from UK!
In my country the only interesting thing is that we have infantas instead of princesses. I will have to read more about the titles of the BRF.

 

[Sereta]

I think the Middletons have an obvious relationship with Hello magazine.
Between the exclusive pieces of information and titbits they get and the 'scratch my back I'll scratch yours' relationship they have developed with Kate's siblings, it's just plain obvious.
Now, do I believe they are phoning-up the Daily Mail or The Sun to give them tips? Absolutely not.

However, you can help but note that the Davys have not engaged in any kind of game or relationship with the media. No candid interviews with a columnist, no features on Hello to promote their business, no invasion of their own privacy, no playing it up for the paps (or engaging in controversial lawsuits).
I think Chelsy and her family have been exceptionally clear regarding drawing lines with the Press, something the Middleton have not been.

I tend to agree with you Idriel.
Also, Chelsy's extended family has not contributed to a book written about them.

I thought that they were using Mountbatten-Windsor? Have they stopped?

I thought William and Harry were using the name Wales as their last name. I know I've seen more than once William Wales or Harry Wales in use. I personally think the name Windsor sounds better. I couldn't imagine Chelsy using the name Chelsy Wales.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I thought William and Harry were using the name Wales as their last name. I know I've seen more than once William Wales or Harry Wales in use. I personally think the name Windsor sounds better. I couldn't imagine Chelsy using the name Chelsy Wales.

Their legal last name is Mountbatten-Windsor, as that is their father's legal last name. So if Harry and Chelsy were to marry, she'd be Princess Henry of Wales, but her legal name would be Chelsy Mountbatten-Windsor.

It's probably easier and more accessible for the both of them (and Andrew's daughters) to use Wales and York as surnames, and that's why they do it.

 

[Iluvbertie]

They use of Wales and York as their sort of surname because they are officially 'of Wales' and 'or York' to identify which line they come from (very useful in the days of Queen Victoria when almost all of her children had a son and/or a daughter named Victoria and Albert so the 'of...' became a way of identifying which one was being referred to).

They will cease to use the 'of Wales' when Charles becomes King or they get their own dukedoms (or lesser titles). The York girls will cease to use the 'of York' when they marry. The boys however will remain Mountbatten-Windsor as their official surname, if one is needed - which is rare as the Prince style overrides the use of a surname.

 

[Sereta]

I understand now. So Wales is just used unofficially, but Mountbatten-Windsor is the official name. I'm just curious, when they're signing checks or official documents would they use Prince Harry of Wales, or Harry Mountbatten-Windsor?

 

[Sereta]

it says at the end that harry posted a message on her fb..so that means hary has one too?

Does Harry and Chelsy really have a Facebook page?

 

[royalsmartie]

Does Harry and Chelsy really have a Facebook page?

we have no idea heck prince albert gf has one maybe harry does too but that was found on hellomagazine site so could be fault as some people have expressed

 

[Mermaid1962]

Prince Charles signed the wedding registry--at least the first time--as Charles P. (the 'p' stands for Princeps, or "prince"). I remember seeing a picture of it. So perhaps they don't need to sign with a surname.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I would assume that they would sign with "William/Harry W." for welcome books, that kind of thing and if they have to sign any checks or legal documents, they'd use their legal names, which would be Mountbatten-Windsor. At least, that is how I interpret it to be.
When William is King, obviously he'd just sign whatever his regnal name is.

 

[Opal]

^^
I tend to think Harry (and William) would use the name of Windsor. I think Princess Anne is the only one who used Mountbatten-Windsor as she's reportedly very close to her father. I remember reading that somewhere. (correct me if I'm wrong)

However Charles chose to just use Windsor, so it's very likely that his sons would follow suit. Then again they might want to use their grandfather's name as well. It's such a long name though. Imagine signing alot of documents with it.

 

[Opal]

Prince Charles signed the wedding registry--at least the first time--as Charles P. (the 'p' stands for Princeps, or "prince"). I remember seeing a picture of it. So perhaps they don't need to sign with a surname.

Are you sure he signed his name that way? It seems odd to put the 'P' after his name. Wouldn't it make more sense to sign as P. Charles or Prince Charles?

Does Harry and Chelsy really have a Facebook page?

I read somewhere that Chelsy has a Facebook page, but that she changed the name of it so no one could find it. Apparently people that she didn't know were logging into it or something or she had some king of problem with it. I'm not sure?
I've never heard that Prince Harry has one, unless someone else has heard something.

 

[wbenson]

"Charles P" is his most formal signature, which he only uses for formal documents (I believe he just uses "Charles" for most things). The P stands for the Latin word for prince (I don't know exactly what it is), much like the R in the Queen's signature, "Elizabeth R," stands for "Regina," which is Latin for queen.

I think William and Harry would sign just plain "William" and "Henry," or maybe "William of Wales" and "Henry of Wales" as their official signatures currently.

ETA:

I would assume that they would sign with "William/Harry W." for welcome books, that kind of thing and if they have to sign any checks or legal documents, they'd use their legal names, which would be Mountbatten-Windsor.

Prince William just writes "William" in visitors books.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Here's a Wikipedia article about Princeps, including it's orginal meaning. Scroll down to "Nobiliary legacy" for its relation to our English word "prince."
Princeps - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sereta]

Harry's wedding will the along the same line as Andrew's, I think. Not as big and ceremonial as William's, but definitely befitting his status as the future Duke of York.

I don't think Harry's wedding will be as grand as Andrew's. To be honest I was surprised at how big Andrew & Sarah's wedding was. It was very close to Charles and Diana's on the scale of it. Charles other siblings had smaller weddings. I could see Harry having his wedding at Windsor.
Do you guys think Harry would or could have a 'private' wedding at a smaller church if he really wanted to. I know William never could but what about Harry? Everyone keeps naming the same churches: St. Paul's, Westminster, Windsor. I'm not familiar with the other churches in England, but what if he wanted it at another church, still a big church but perhaps not as grand as the ones named? With the Queen being thrifty lately, would it be a possibility?

 

[Iluvbertie]

Anne's wedding was certainly huge for a wedding in the early 1970s and as the only daughter of the Queen.
The people wanted the bigger celebrations in the 1980s but after the failure of the three marriages with the big weddings a smaller one, more in keeping with 19th century royal weddings was arranged for Edward.

The problem with a lot of the other churches is access and security - for instance Canterbury cathedral is sort of in the main street of Canterbury.
York is a possibility but again security and any form of procession would be difficult.
London is set up for the procession routes to Westminster and St Pauls' whereas Windsor would see a smaller crowd able to witness the arrival of guests, no procession with people likely to be walking.

I think both will have London with the Abbey more likely than St Pauls - although they may opt for the smaller St Margaret's next to the Abbey to allow for fewer guests but still allow the street crowd to assemble.

 

[wbenson]

It would be pretty easy to have a procession route through the town in Windsor, actually, leaving the Upper Ward, down the Long Walk, and through town to the King Henry VIII gate. It's essentially what processions for state visits do (and also what King George VI's funeral procession did, going the long way into the castle instead of simply crossing the street from the railway station).

I think London is more likely, however, probably the Abbey. (I would prefer St. Paul's for purely aesthetic reasons, though. I'd also prefer Tom Fleming as a commentator but seeing as he just died that isn't happening either. I at least hope that any future royal weddings at Westminster Abbey don't make use of that truly awful canopy at the entrance that was seen at Andrew and Sarah's wedding.)

 

[Katrianna]

I'm sure that if and when Harry marries, his wedding will be an elaborate affair. Yep, wbenson, that canopy was tacky, hopefully it has disappeared forever.