Prince William and Catherine Middleton Possible Titles

[Kataryn]

I don't think I like the sound of it Duke of Clarence....nope not at all..

There used to be a TV series called Daktari in the 1960s - the animal hero was Clarence, the cross-eyed lion....

 

[MARG]

the morning of their wedding, Her Majesty will announce their titles.

2) Princess Catherine


3/4),,Duke/Duchess of Clarence/Cambridge

Sorry, she can't be Princess Catherine. She is not born a royal as are Princesses Anne, Beatrice and Eugenie. If the Queen created her a princess in her own right she would be setting an incredibly far reaching precedent. Ructions in her own family . . . . Gloucester's, Kent's etc.

 

[muriel]

Sorry, she can't be Princess Catherine. She is not born a royal as are Princesses Anne, Beatrice and Eugenie. If the Queen created her a princess in her own right she would be setting an incredibly far reaching precedent. Ructions in her own family . . . . Gloucester's, Kent's etc.

I do not believe anybody is suggesting that Catherine be created a princess in her own right - that I believe will not be appropriate. I had previously suggested that whilst Catherine would on marriage become The Princess William, ........ the couple could ask the Queen that Catherine be styled as Princess Catherine. There are many arguments for and against such a move, but irrespective of what she her real style and title is, she will be called Princess Kate by most people in the UK.

 

[MRSJ]

Sorry, she can't be Princess Catherine. She is not born a royal as are Princesses Anne, Beatrice and Eugenie. If the Queen created her a princess in her own right she would be setting an incredibly far reaching precedent. Ructions in her own family . . . . Gloucester's, Kent's etc.

It's not she can't be, but she probably won't be....I agree with Muriel that everyone will probably call her Princesd Catherine/Kate anyways so possibly the Queen should allow her to be styled as such....either way a Duchess/Duke title would make the point mute....and if bride and groom are ok w/Princess William it's ok w/me.... I go by Mrs J because it's my husbands name and now it's mine and it doesn't nullify anything I've accomplished and isn't my only accomplishment by far

 

[Lady Ann]

There used to be a TV series called Daktari in the 1960s - the animal hero was Clarence, the cross-eyed lion....

oh my...lol...Well, I did not know that .

 

[Lady Marmalade]

I do not agree. But if the Queen did do that, then I think the only fair thing to do is to create Princess Michael...Princess Marie Christine. Sorry, I believe in being fair. What you do for one, you do for the other, no matter their rank.

 

[texankitcat]

I do not agree. But if the Queen did do that, then I think the only fair thing to do is to create Princess Michael...Princess Marie Christine. Sorry, I believe in being fair. What you do for one, you do for the other, no matter their rank.

Except that Princess Michael's husband is not in line to the throne having forfeited his place when he married her. There lies the difference IMO.

 

[branchg]

The Queen is not going to start a new precedent for wives of sons or male-line grandsons of The Sovereign, especially after the fiasco with Diana and Sarah divorcing her sons.

It will be "Princess William of Wales" or "Countess/Duchess of X".

 

[muriel]

I do not agree. But if the Queen did do that, then I think the only fair thing to do is to create Princess Michael...Princess Marie Christine. Sorry, I believe in being fair. What you do for one, you do for the other, no matter their rank.

I hope you do appreciate the difference between being created a Princess of the UK, and being styled as a Princess.

I do not believe the comparison with Princess Michael is an appropriate one: Princess Michael is a relatively junior royal, and her husband is not even in the line of succession. Sophie is probably a closer comparison.

 

[Lumutqueen]

As an independent female why should she take any title at all from her husband - whatever she uses it will be due to him and not anything she has done. Every name she uses from April 29 will be because of who she married and nothing else so why not be totally honest and use his name - Princess William sounds fine to me - as a feminist - it shows exactly what she has done.

Lovely post

 

[Iluvbertie]

Except that Princess Michael's husband is not in line to the throne having forfeited his place when he married her. There lies the difference IMO.

Having given up his right to the throne doesn't impact at all on the title his wife has. She is called Princess Michael simply because he has no other title.

If Catherine was to convert to Catholicism tomorrow and thus deprive William of his right he would still be Prince William and she would still be entitled to be Princess William.

She won't be entitled to Princess Catherine for the simple reason that she wasn't born a princess.

As they claim to be a 'modern' couple and why not keep her own name of Catherine Middleton - and thus they become HRH Prince William of Wales and Ms Catherine Middleton (the feminist in me loves that concept).

I would love to see gender equality in titles and as females can't give titles to their husbands automatically I don't see why men can give them to their wives - totally discriminatory in my opinion.

 

[abcdxyz]

I don't think I like the sound of it Duke of Clarence....nope not at all..

I'm not crazy about "Clarence" myself (sorry, I don't mean to offend any Clarences on this forum), but it's a very old title and one with quite a history. Very appropriate.

 

[Sister Morphine]

While the last king named William was the Duke of Clarence (Queen Victoria's uncle), the last royal to hold the title died young (George V's older brother). Much like the name John, I would assume they'd want to shy away from any names or designations that are ill-fated or otherwise "cursed".

I honestly believe it'll be Cambridge.

 

[Americanskipper]

I'm actually leaning toward Duke of Clarence for William. King William IV was Duke of Clarence for 41 years before he became king. Why not give the same title to the prince who will probably one day become William V?

Not only that, but the last Duke of Clarence was also the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. I suspect if William becomes a Duke, it will be Clarence. Though I also think an Earl is more likely - since he will eventually get another Duke when his father comes to the throne. But I think getting no title is the most likely, especially since his children will be given titles as if William were a Duke anyway. Assuming he gets no title, what would his eldest son be named? 'HRH Prince X of Wales' (like his father)? Just plain 'HRH Prince X'? And his other children, what would they be titled? Lord and Lady of Wales? or just 'Lord and Lady'?

 

[Lady Oona]

I agree that if William and Catherine are bestowed a title it will be an Earldom. I believe it is more fitting since he is not the current heir and I just feel like William and Catherine would like a more "low key" title- As low key as an earl can get!

 

[Lady Ann]

I agree that if William and Catherine are bestowed a title it will be an Earldom. I believe it is more fitting since he is not the current heir and I just feel like William and Catherine would like a more "low key" title- As low key as an earl can get!

I see nothing wrong with an Earldom either for both the reasons you have stated.

 

[Sister Morphine]

But I think getting no title is the most likely, especially since his children will be given titles as if William were a Duke anyway. Assuming he gets no title, what would his eldest son be named? 'HRH Prince X of Wales' (like his father)? Just plain 'HRH Prince X'? And his other children, what would they be titled? Lord and Lady of Wales? or just 'Lord and Lady'?

According to Letters Patent issued in 1917 by George V, the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales is afforded the title and style of HRH Prince X of Y. Any subsequent children would be styled as the children of a duke (or earl) and accordingly be Lord/Lady X Windsor. So say William and Kate have a son while the Queen is still on the throne. If they are the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge, their son would be HRH Prince X of Cambridge (or whatever territorial designation they have). If their first born is a girl, she would be Lady X Windsor. If their next child after that girl is a son, he would HRH Prince X of Y.

All that would change obviously, once Charles becomes king. Because then William's children would be grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line and afforded the title and style of HRH Prince/Princess X of Y. Same for Harry's kids.

 

[windsorgirl]

I think that William will be given a Dukedom because it sets the stage for Harry who will not inherit a better title in the future in the traditional way. I would anticipate that Harry gets married while QEII is still living, gets a Dukedom and then is good to go.

 

[Osipi]

According to Letters Patent issued in 1917 by George V, the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales is afforded the title and style of HRH Prince X of Y. Any subsequent children would be styled as the children of a duke (or earl) and accordingly be Lord/Lady X Windsor. So say William and Kate have a son while the Queen is still on the throne. If they are the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge, their son would be HRH Prince X of Cambridge (or whatever territorial designation they have). If their first born is a girl, she would be Lady X Windsor. If their next child after that girl is a son, he would HRH Prince X of Y.

All that would change obviously, once Charles becomes king. Because then William's children would be grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line and afforded the title and style of HRH Prince/Princess X of Y. Same for Harry's kids.

The only thing different here would be that the surname would be Mountbatten Windsor rather than Windsor.

 

[texankitcat]

Having given up his right to the throne doesn't impact at all on the title his wife has. She is called Princess Michael simply because he has no other title.

If Catherine was to convert to Catholicism tomorrow and thus deprive William of his right he would still be Prince William and she would still be entitled to be Princess William.

She won't be entitled to Princess Catherine for the simple reason that she wasn't born a princess.

As they claim to be a 'modern' couple and why not keep her own name of Catherine Middleton - and thus they become HRH Prince William of Wales and Ms Catherine Middleton (the feminist in me loves that concept).

I would love to see gender equality in titles and as females can't give titles to their husbands automatically I don't see why men can give them to their wives - totally discriminatory in my opinion.

Yes, I understand that Prince Michael is still a Prince and his wife is still HRH, Princess Michael. I didn't say otherwise.

Although assuming the feminine form of the male title is traditional in the BRF, I find it antiquated compared to other royal houses. Perhaps one day that will change.

 

[Mia_mae]

According to Letters Patent issued in 1917 by George V, the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales is afforded the title and style of HRH Prince X of Y. Any subsequent children would be styled as the children of a duke (or earl) and accordingly be Lord/Lady X Windsor. So say William and Kate have a son while the Queen is still on the throne. If they are the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge, their son would be HRH Prince X of Cambridge (or whatever territorial designation they have). If their first born is a girl, she would be Lady X Windsor. If their next child after that girl is a son, he would HRH Prince X of Y.

All that would change obviously, once Charles becomes king. Because then William's children would be grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line and afforded the title and style of HRH Prince/Princess X of Y. Same for Harry's kids.

You see, I have a issue with that more than the whole "Princess William of Wales". The fact that a son would be a Prince but a daughter would be a Lady does not sit well with me, oh well! But that's an issue for another thread....

 

[Iluvbertie]

Yes, I understand that Prince Michael is still a Prince and his wife is still HRH, Princess Michael. I didn't say otherwise.

I didn't say you did.

I was pointing out that just because Micheal had to give up any claim to the throne his wife was still made a Princess on marriage and that that issue had nothing to do with, or impact on, the title he held or that she could therefore assume.

Although assuming the feminine form of the male title is traditional in the BRF, I find it antiquated compared to other royal houses. Perhaps one day that will change.

I find the fact that the male can make is spouse a princess antiquated in a modern world. I also find it totally discriminatory that a princess can make her spouse a prince, or pass on the title to her children, even for one generation. e.g. I think Zara should be a princess as a grandchild of the monarch and should also be able to make Mike a prince - if woman won't equality then that issue also needs to be considered.


But I must admit I prefer the British way over the continental one as it is clear who was born royal and who married into the royal caste. If one is to have such a grouping then I believe you have to be born royal and that if not, even on marriage, you don't suddenly become royal.

 

[Royal_Eagle]

You see, I have a issue with that more than the whole "Princess William of Wales". The fact that a son would be a Prince but a daughter would be a Lady does not sit well with me, oh well! But that's an issue for another thread....

I agree...I hope the Queen will eventually issue LPs making all children of PW and Catherine HRHs on their birth, on the ground that they'll eventually become HRHs anyway (when PC and/or PW become King).

On the other hand, I greatly respect their wishes to be more "modern", even if it mean letting their children be just Lady/Lord (except for the first born son) first. I'm just kinda traditional, but do recognize that sometimes things need to change. I think they'll figure out a good combination of remaining traditional while becoming more modern, just like PW's past ancestors (the Queen, etc)

 

[Sister Morphine]

You see, I have a issue with that more than the whole "Princess William of Wales". The fact that a son would be a Prince but a daughter would be a Lady does not sit well with me, oh well! But that's an issue for another thread....

It's only the eldest son that would be a prince. If William and Catherine have 3 boys before Charles is king, the youngest two would be Lord X Windsor. If they have all girls, they'd all be Lady X Windsor until Charles was king, when they'd be Princess X of Y.

All of William's children will a Prince/Princess at some point. This isn't that big of a deal.

I agree...I hope the Queen will eventually issue LPs making all children of PW and Catherine HRHs on their birth, on the ground that they'll eventually become HRHs anyway (when PC and/or PW become King).

On the other hand, I greatly respect their wishes to be more "modern", even if it mean letting their children be just Lady/Lord (except for the first born son) first. I'm just kinda traditional, but do recognize that sometimes things need to change. I think they'll figure out a good combination of remaining traditional while becoming more modern, just like PW's past ancestors (the Queen, etc)

It makes zero sense for the Queen to write new Letters Patent when William's children, no matter the gender, will be Prince/Princess of the UK with the style HRH once Charles is King. I mean, it would be one thing if they would never be able to be afforded that title/style in the first place, but they will be. It's a forgone conclusion.

 

[Kataryn]

Although assuming the feminine form of the male title is traditional in the BRF, I find it antiquated compared to other royal houses. Perhaps one day that will change.

It's not only the RF but the whole aristocracy. The wife of the younger sons of dukes and marquesses take their husband's title with his first name. The wife of Lord Peter X becomes Lady Peter X just like Lord Nicolas Windsor's wife became Lady Nicolas. Just in case that the bride is of higher rank than her husband (like son of a marquess and daughter of a duke) or an equal (both children of dukes or marquesses) she can choose to keep her first name.

 

[wbenson]

It makes zero sense for the Queen to write new Letters Patent when William's children, no matter the gender, will be Prince/Princess of the UK with the style HRH once Charles is King. I mean, it would be one thing if they would never be able to be afforded that title/style in the first place, but they will be. It's a forgone conclusion.

Wasn't it also pretty much a foregone conclusion in 1948, though? George VI and Elizabeth weren't realistically going to have any more children, and Princess Elizabeth was treated as the de facto heiress apparent. I suppose Charles and Anne were the grandchildren of the monarch rather than the great-grandchildren, though.

 

[Iluvbertie]

It makes zero sense for the Queen to write new Letters Patent when William's children, no matter the gender, will be Prince/Princess of the UK with the style HRH once Charles is King. I mean, it would be one thing if they would never be able to be afforded that title/style in the first place, but they will be. It's a forgone conclusion.

I agree to a certain extant.

However, if Charles predeceases the Queen I could see her issuing LPs to give HRH to all children of both Harry and William as Harry's children wouldn't get it automatically if Charles doesn't become King. Of course William would probably grant them that right himself but we don't know what the future holds and they could have a major falling out over something and not be on speaking terms at that point in time (unlikely I know but it is still possible).

 

[Americanskipper]

According to Letters Patent issued in 1917 by George V, the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales is afforded the title and style of HRH Prince X of Y. Any subsequent children would be styled as the children of a duke (or earl) and accordingly be Lord/Lady X Windsor. So say William and Kate have a son while the Queen is still on the throne. If they are the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge, their son would be HRH Prince X of Cambridge (or whatever territorial designation they have). If their first born is a girl, she would be Lady X Windsor. If their next child after that girl is a son, he would HRH Prince X of Y.

I understand that. My question is, if William and Kate are not make a Duke and Duchess, and so have no territorial designation, then what would their eldest son be named? Would he be HRH Prince X of Wales (just like His father)?

 

[Catherine Helvin]

No, if William and Kate's first child is a girl, she'd be titled HRH Princess X of Wales, assuming that William doesn't have an earldom or dukedom.

 

[Americanskipper]

No, if William and Kate's first child is a girl, she'd be titled HRH Princess X of Wales, assuming that William doesn't have an earldom or dukedom.

No! While the Queen is still on the throne, and Prince Charles is still POW, if William does not get an Earl or a Duke with a territory, all of William and Kate's children (with the exception of their eldest son) will simply be lord and lady.

My question, is regarding their eldest son. Would he be Prince X of Wales, exactly the same as William and Henry? It doesn't seem like he should be, since his father would not be the Prince of Wales. But I don't know.