Prince William and Catherine Middleton Possible Titles

[Tsarevitch]

Although, I would love to see her called anything but Princess William. I see nothing wrong with it as it wont be forever. I don't see it as sexist or damaging at all, it is tradition and that is what the royal family is all about. She will get other titles in time. IMO they will be Duke and Duchess of xxx. only a short time to wait and see now.

PS I will be very surprised if she is called Princess Catherine...

Little correction:
Catherine will not get any title. She can address herself with her husband's style and titles, like is the tradition or social custom. The title(s) are and remains William's.

 

[muriel]

Whilst a break with the past, I do maintain that it would be very nice to see Catherine styled as Princess Catherine - thats what everybody will refer to her as, so lets just style her so. Before the purists attack the post, I am not suggesting that she be created as a Princess of the UK, but merely be styled so.

 

[Tsarevitch]

Whilst a break with the past, I do maintain that it would be very nice to see Catherine styled as Princess Catherine - thats what everybody will refer to her as, so lets just style her so. Before the purists attack the post, I am not suggesting that she be created as a Princess of the UK, but merely be styled so.

It is no problem to create Catherine a Princess in her own right. The same happened to Prince Philip. Let me recreate this to Catherine's case:

The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm bearing date April 29th 2011, to give and grant unto Her Royal Highness Princess William of Wales born Miss Catherine Elizabeth Middleton, the style and titular dignity of a Princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The Queen has been pleased to declare Her will and pleasure that Her Royal Highness Princess William of Wales shall henceforth be known as Her Royal Highness The Princess Catherine.

 

[HRHHermione]

I'm so interested in this particular issue. I think that if the royal family going forward would like to establish the precedent that a royal wife will not be styled with her husbands first name, this is the time to do it: first of the new generation to get married and a senior member of the family who's close to the throne. Plus I see good arguments against granting William a ducal title that he'll likely only use for a short while.

 

[Kataryn]

I'm so interested in this particular issue. I think that if the royal family going forward would like to establish the precedent that a royal wife will not be styled with her husbands first name, this is the time to do it: first of the new generation to get married and a senior member of the family who's close to the throne. Plus I see good arguments against granting William a ducal title that he'll likely only use for a short while.

When did they start to use this Princess Husband's First Name anyway?
I don't recall to have read that this particular was used in the Middle Ages, neither with the Royals or Peers - tehy didn't even use Princess for the daughters of kings but The Lady Elizabeth or The Lady Mary for the daughters of Henry VIII.

So there must have been a change. Did the first Georges take over the use from the British aristocracy? I think all sons fo the monarch were given their own peerage before marrying and I don't think they had that many male-line grandchildren given people didn't live as long as today back then.
Or do you know of any "Prince and Princess Michael"-situation before this actual prince Michael without any further title?

Or was it Victoria with her male offspring who decreed it?

i mean there must have been a first situation like that and eg Letters Patents?

The Empress Frederick was AFAIK an example in German history - the Germanic monarchies always refered to their Princesses/Queens/Empresses by marriage by first name. I think the Empress Frederick (Kaiserin Friedrich) was used due to the fact that Victoria was a British princess and her son Wilhelm was very much influenced by British customs. But I have never heard the reference to his wife as the "Empress Wilhelm". Maybe Victoria preferred Kaiserin Friedrich to "Kaiserinwitwe" (Dowager Empress) or "Kaiserinmutter" (Empress Mother).

 

[Zonk]

Well, really you can't go by Henry VIII. His daughters were known as Princessess until he had them declared illegtimate and then they were known as The Lady Mary and the Lady Elizabeth. But its worth noting that until the Tudor reign (I believe it was Henry VIII), the King was known as His Royal Highness and not Your Majesty.

But for a few exceptions, not counting recent times....most of the women marring into the BRF have been Princesses of some realm. So there was not need. Immeadiate exceptions that come to mind are four of Henry VIII wives (Anne B, Catherine H, Catherine P. and Jane Seymour). Then you have Elizabeth Woodville (might have been different since new husband was already the King Edward IV). Anne Hyde (known as Duchess of York wife to future King James II).

All of Victoria's son's married a Princess or Duchess so again it wasn't necessary. It hasn't been a need until the 20th century that you have had a ton of commoners marry into the BRF...and they all weren't made Princesses in their own right.

I think the Queen will follow history and make Catherine a Duchess and call it a day.

 

[Lady Deborah]

My goodness! What is wrong with being "Princess William"? Sexist - not in my book. The reason, in my mind, that the BRF is the be-all, end-all of modernity's monarchies is that they have retained most the grace and custom of bygone years.

Sorry and don't mean to offend but in my
Opinion the 'grace ' of bygone years in no
Way should include the substandardization of half the population. One can have grace and move with the times. I am an
Example!

 

[Kataryn]

The Queen has been pleased to declare Her will and pleasure that Her Royal Highness Princess William of Wales shall henceforth be known as Her Royal Highness The Princess Catherine.

She would not be The Princess Catherine as this is reserved for the children of the monarch. But the Queen could create her or allow her to use the style of HRH Princess Catherine like she did with Princess Alice, (Dowager) Duchess of Gloucester. There has been no other example as HRH Princess Marina, (Dowager) Duchess of Kent was a princess born and HRH The Duchess of York became HM Queen Elizabeth and later HM Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, while the Duchess of Windsor never was accepted as a princess.

Personally I don't think we can guess what HM is thinking about this and what she will do. During her long reign she has seen a lot of changes in society and in her own family. She has seen how her parents treated her uncle, a former king and his wife, who was a divorcee, she has allowed to present divorcees at her court, seen her sister and three of her children file for divorce and her heir marry a divorcee without loosing his place in her family and her succession.

She stripped her two daughter-in-laws of their HRH-styles, which for her (think about the Windsor-title-drama) surely was the right thing to do for her considering the past but turned out to be to no avail for the people and the media of the UK. They still spoke and wrote about "The Duchess of York" and "Princess Di" as if nothing had happened. As nothing really had happened, for most people HRH is simply a style, but nothing you use in ordinary life when referring to a person.

Then there is the example of Denmark. Alexandra after her divorce was stripped of her HRH as well, but got the HH-style while keeping the name of a princess till she remarried, then using her own title of a Countess. Thus she was firmly put in her place while at the same time she was recognized for what she had been and what she became on her new marriage.

So I wouldn't wonder if HM tried out something else this time: on allowing Catherine to use the style of HRH Princess Catherine, Princess William of Wales or The Duchess of X, she shows the world who Catherine is now - second-in-line to become Queen consort. But in case of a divorce, she could simply stop allowing her to use that style and bestow a different style/title without Royal references for future use after the divorce is final.
Which would be something people understand much easier than the fact that there was a difference between The Princess of Wales (known to most as Princess Diana) and Diana, Princess of Wales. When former "Princess Catherine" is suddenly known as Baroness Catherine or Lady Catherine, people would notice that the former princess is no longer one.

 

[melissaadrian]

My goodness! What is wrong with being "Princess William"? Sexist - not in my book. The reason, in my mind, that the BRF is the be-all, end-all of modernity's monarchies is that they have retained most the grace and custom of bygone years.

It is survival. The common people, especially in the commonwealth are starting to see the royal family as antiquated, as old fashioned and no longer needed. The pomp and ceremony is seen as frivelous, and the family too stuck in the past. The monarchies on the continent have changed and adapted, have made changes to reflect their country and how it is changing and growing. The introduction of equal primogeniture for instance. A monarchy is meant to reflect the people it serves, to be a shinning example of what the country is and stands for. When it clings to out dated sexist standards of women belonging to their husbands, and daughters not being good enough to be heirs, what does that say to the people? Times have changed, and if the monarchy hopes to survive, it needs to as well.

 

[Lady Deborah]

Is there a separate thread for how to address
Various royals? Or would that bw under etiquette? Zonk's comment about Henry VIII is right and also back then he was addressed as
'your Grace'.

 

[Tsarevitch]

She would not be The Princess Catherine as this is reserved for the children of the monarch.

The use of 'The' for children of the monarch is a widespread thought but not chiselled in stone. Recently Buckingham Palace itself issued a pdf file with members of the royal family and they wrote HRH The Prince William of Wales and HRH The Prince Henry of Wales, while they are no sons of the Sovereign at all.

Furthermore also the spouse of the Queen is -in full- styled as HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. See the link. This while Philip is no son of a Sovereign either.

This means that the precedence is there. Her Majesty can order that Miss Middleton will be HRH The Princess Catherine.

 

[Lumutqueen]

This pdf, do you have a link to that as well?
IMO, she shouldn't be given the title Princess in her own right and she shouldn't have a THE in front of her name until she is the Kings daughter in law, if that's the way it would work.

 

[HRHHermione]

This has turned into a fascinating thread. This and the tiara are really the things about the wedding I'm most looking forward to finding out. I'm now really hoping for either HRH Princess Catherine of Wales or HRH The Duchess of Cambridge.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

[QUOTE=Lady Deborah;1216539]
Opinion the 'grace ' of bygone years in no
Way should include the substandardization of half the population. One can have grace and move with the times. I am an
Example![/QUOTE]

I don't see it as a substandardization at all. Grace does not have to announce itself.

...Her Majesty can order that Miss Middleton will be HRH The Princess Catherine.

Yes, HM can order anything she wants...but I'll bet she won't. And, whatever HM decides to do will be fine with me.

 

[branchg]

The Queen could indeed grant Catherine the right to be known as "HRH Princess Catherine" upon marriage without issuing Letters Patent. Unlike Philip, a wife takes the rank, style and title of her husband upon marriage, so allowing Catherine the style of "Princess Catherine" is simply an exception to tradition, as she automatically becomes a Princess of the UK.

Philip was naturalized to Lt. Philip Mountbatten, RN and had no titles in Great Britain until George VI created him Duke of Edinburgh with the rank of HRH shortly before his wedding to The Queen. Since there was a question of whether he was, in fact, created a Prince of the UK automatically with the granting of HRH (constitutional experts said he was not), The Queen issued Letters Patent in 1957 formally granting him the style and rank of "HRH The Prince Philip" in his own right.

Diana and Sarah lost their HRH status because it arrived with marriage and departed with divorce. The Queen issued Letters Patent in 1996 clarifying that a former wife of a Prince of the UK, unless a widow until she remarries, would not be entitled to the style of HRH upon divorce. They retained their former titles as styles, consistent with practice for a former wife of a Peer, similar to a surname, but lost their status and precedence (Diana was granted unique precedence as the mother of a future King).

Wallis Simpson was denied royal rank through the issuance of Letters Patent by George VI prior to the wedding. Since the style of HRH Prince/Princess of the UK is entirely within the gift of The Sovereign, he chose to deny Wallis the right to share her husband's royal rank and style as HRH The Princess Edward. Instead, she was a Duchess with the rank and style of Her Grace.

I see no reason why Catherine would be granted the right to be "HRH Princess Catherine" upon marriage. The Queen is a traditionalist and would no doubt feel uncomfortable granting something her own daughter-in-laws and wives of her cousins are not allowed.

 

[Queen Penelope]

This has turned into a fascinating thread. This and the tiara are really the things about the wedding I'm most looking forward to finding out. I'm now really hoping for either HRH Princess Catherine of Wales or HRH The Duchess of Cambridge.

I too can't wait to see the tiara either!!.

I hope they get a Dukedom, I think that would make the most sense. Like I said, personally I don't have a problem with her being Princess William - we all know her name is Kate/Catherine and IMO she would officially be known as Princess William yet still be called by her name (generally speaking). I see where others are coming from that it doesn't sound as modern as Duchess of X, but I don't really understand how you lose your identity by being referred to by your husband name in a official capacity (as Kate would be). IMO It's not like she would cease to be called Kate. If anyone could articulate their POV as to why they feel you lose your identity, that would be great!

 

[NGalitzine]

She would not be The Princess Catherine as this is reserved for the children of the monarch. But the Queen could create her or allow her to use the style of HRH Princess Catherine like she did with Princess Alice, (Dowager) Duchess of Gloucester. There has been no other example as HRH Princess Marina, (Dowager) Duchess of Kent was a princess born and HRH The Duchess of York became HM Queen Elizabeth and later HM Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, while the Duchess of Windsor never was accepted as a princess.

Actually the case of Princess Marina was the same as Alice, Dowager Duchess of Gloucester. Neither wanted to ebDowager Duchess so they were both asked and were granted the right to call themselves Princess X, Duchess of X. Marina was born Princess of Greece & Denmark which carried no weight in the UK.


There would be a slight problem with allowing Catherine to style herself Princess Catherine because of Princess Michael of Kent. Doubtful The Queen would allow MC the same privelege. The woman has been married to Prince Michael and has after all never received the Family Order or even the DStJ so seems unlikely she would ever be alloed to style herself as Princess Marie Christine of Kent.

As for creating Catherine a British HRH and Princess in her own right, what happens should the marriage (God forbid) breakdown? Could Letters Patent be revoked.

 

[Princess of Durham]

However .... Catherine will be a bit "higher up the chain" so to speak. than Princes Michael of Kent.

 

[melissaadrian]

I too can't wait to see the tiara either!!.

I hope they get a Dukedom, I think that would make the most sense. Like I said, personally I don't have a problem with her being Princess William - we all know her name is Kate/Catherine and IMO she would officially be known as Princess William yet still be called by her name (generally speaking). I see where others are coming from that it doesn't sound as modern as Duchess of X, but I don't really understand how you lose your identity by being referred to by your husband name in a official capacity (as Kate would be). IMO It's not like she would cease to be called Kate. If anyone could articulate their POV as to why they feel you lose your identity, that would be great!

How do you not understand? The press may call her Kate, but every single event, every press release, every invitation, she will be Princess William. How many non royal fans know what Princess Michael's name is? Very few. She has her own name, why should she be referred to as her husband's name. A name is part of your identity. Do people call you your husband's name? Do they say hi (insert your name) or do they say hi (insert your husband's name)? I feel sorry for you if it is the latter.

 

[Zonk]

The Queen could indeed grant Catherine the right to be known as "HRH Princess Catherine" upon marriage without issuing Letters Patent. Unlike Philip, a wife takes the rank, style and title of her husband upon marriage, so allowing Catherine the style of "Princess Catherine" is simply an exception to tradition, as she automatically becomes a Princess of the UK.

Philip was naturalized to Lt. Philip Mountbatten, RN and had no titles in Great Britain until George VI created him Duke of Edinburgh with the rank of HRH shortly before his wedding to The Queen. Since there was a question of whether he was, in fact, created a Prince of the UK automatically with the granting of HRH (constitutional experts said he was not), The Queen issued Letters Patent in 1957 formally granting him the style and rank of "HRH The Prince Philip" in his own right.

Diana and Sarah lost their HRH status because it arrived with marriage and departed with divorce. The Queen issued Letters Patent in 1996 clarifying that a former wife of a Prince of the UK, unless a widow until she remarries, would not be entitled to the style of HRH upon divorce. They retained their former titles as styles, consistent with practice for a former wife of a Peer, similar to a surname, but lost their status and precedence (Diana was granted unique precedence as the mother of a future King).

Wallis Simpson was denied royal rank through the issuance of Letters Patent by George VI prior to the wedding. Since the style of HRH Prince/Princess of the UK is entirely within the gift of The Sovereign, he chose to deny Wallis the right to share her husband's royal rank and style as HRH The Princess Edward. Instead, she was a Duchess with the rank and style of Her Grace.

I see no reason why Catherine would be granted the right to be "HRH Princess Catherine" upon marriage. The Queen is a traditionalist and would no doubt feel uncomfortable granting something her own daughter-in-laws and wives of her cousins are not allowed.

Thank you for your detailed and concise posts.

I believe you hit the nail on the head....the Queen is a tradionalist and I don't think she would ever make Catherine a Princess in her own right, when she hasn't done the same for Camilla, Sophie, Brigitte, Marie Christine and Katharine who have all done great work on behalf of the BRF for many years. Not to say that Kate wouldn't but why grant something that hasn't been earned?

 

[Lady Ann]

Little correction:
Catherine will not get any title. She can address herself with her husband's style and titles, like is the tradition or social custom. The title(s) are and remains William's.

Thanks for your little correction...I had assumed that everyone (or most posters) here would have known that I ment she would get (or be able to use)the titles as William acquired them.. but I should know what happens when I assume Why it is almost the same as you assuming I did not know the difference..

 

[Tsarevitch]

However .... Catherine will be a bit "higher up the chain" so to speak. than Princes Michael of Kent.

Absolutely, she will follow her spouse's rank (when she is with him) and therefore be the third lady of the country. In the exceptional case that there is a formal assembly of royal ladies only, things are not so clear.

It is believed that The Princess Royal then takes precedence before The Duchess of Cornwall because she is a Princess of the blood royal and a daughter of the Sovereign. This happens rarely. Usually on larger formal royal gatherings the precedence is determined by the rank of all royals attending (1st Elizabeth & Philip, 2nd Charles & Camilla, etc.).

 

[Jacknch]

I am starting to hope that a title is not granted to William and Kate when they get married because they will have little connection to it in reality, which I do not think is acceptable in this day and age. Of-course I am quite a traditionalist at heart and hate too much change too quickly and if a title is granted that's fine. It's just that I think if they became Duke and Duchess of Cambridge for instance, unless they form some kind of a connection with that city, it's going to be pointless - at least to the younger generations. I do wonder whether consideration could be given to granting a completely new Ducal title that would connect the holder with the name of the place.

 

[Mirabel]

Assuming William has two sons, like Charles did, it is possible any ducal title he receives now could be given to the second son, once William is King and his older son is POW?

 

[HRHHermione]

Assuming William has two sons, like Charles did, it is possible any ducal title he receives now could be given to the second son, once William is King and his older son is POW?

His title would merge with the crown, so it's certainly possible it could be recreated, but it wouldn't be inherited.

 

[HRHHermione]

How do you not understand? The press may call her Kate, but every single event, every press release, every invitation, she will be Princess William. How many non royal fans know what Princess Michael's name is? Very few. She has her own name, why should she be referred to as her husband's name. A name is part of your identity. Do people call you your husband's name? Do they say hi (insert your name) or do they say hi (insert your husband's name)? I feel sorry for you if it is the latter.

I agree that formality will undoubtedly be a large part of Catherine's life due to being part of the royal family and I hate the idea of her being addressed by her husband's first name in any segment of her life. Us commoners have the choice to never go by our husband's first name. In this role, Catherine won't have that choice unless she's allowed to formally style herself Princess Catherine, and if the precedent isn't set with her, it's unlikely to change at any point in the immediate future as she'll be the highest ranking female in this generation of royals.

 

[HRHHermione]

My argument would be that the right to be styled with your own first name shouldn't have to be earned and that styling her Princess Catherine of Wales should be analogous to styling her Mrs. Catherine Wales instead of Mr. William Wales. It shouldn't be a style she'd retain upon divorce, but it should be one she's allowed to use while married. I think that the Queen, while a traditionalist, is more aware than anyone that the monarchy must adapt to survive, so I don't think we can discount it entirely

Sorry... Er, "Mrs. William Wales".

 

[branchg]

Catherine would be fourth in official precedence when William is present as he takes his place after his grandfather, his father, and his two uncles (he is the eldest son of the eldest son of The Sovereign). On her own, Catherine will be fifth (after The Queen, The Duchess of Cornwall, The Countess of Wessex and The Princess Royal).

At court, he usually is after his grandfather and father, so Catherine would be third at royal occasions when with her husband. She is likely to be sixth at court on her own (after The Queen, The Princess Royal, Princess Alexandra, The Duchess of Cornwall and The Countess of Wessex).

 

[Zonk]

My argument would be that the right to be styled with your own first name shouldn't have to be earned and that styling her Princess Catherine of Wales should be analogous to styling her Mrs. Catherine Wales instead of Mr. William Wales. It shouldn't be a style she'd retain upon divorce, but it should be one she's allowed to use while married. I think that the Queen, while a traditionalist, is more aware than anyone that the monarchy must adapt to survive, so I don't think we can discount it entirely

But if you think about it, and it is certainly the topic of another thread....what updated thing in the last 20 to 50 years has the British monarchy done? Anne is still after her brothers, and Roman Catholics can't inheirit the throne. Royals can divorce and remarry and still remain in the line of succession that is about it.

So placing one's name is not a priority in order to get with the times. And again, Catherine hasn't done anything different or for the British monarchy as of yet that she should get different treatment. And if nothing else, the Queen doesn't like people to stand out and be different. So if Catherine is to be called Princess Catherine than she would certainly want to extend the same option to Sophie, Camilla, Brigitte, Alexandra and Marie Christine.

 

[ladongas]

Here's a link to the pdf...

This pdf, do you have a link to that as well?
...

...which refers to The Prince William.

http://www.royal.gov.uk/pdf/Coats of arms/ANNEX C - Royal Family.pdf