The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Prince Harry and Prince William

Join The Royal Forums Today
View Poll Results: What Title will the Queen bestow on William and Catherine?
Duke of Clarence 25 16.45%
Duke of Cambridge 68 44.74%
Duke of Sussex 5 3.29%
Duke of Windsor 8 5.26%
Duke of Kendall 2 1.32%
Earl of Something 8 5.26%
Hey! My choice isn't listed. I think it will be something else. 10 6.58%
Nothing. I think they will remain Prince and Princess William of Wales 26 17.11%
Voters: 152. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1161  
Old 04-06-2011, 01:10 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal_Eagle View Post
And IF by some miracle the Queen live long enough (say another 30 years or so) and Prince William's first son have a son, that son will also be HRH and a Prince.
The 1917 letters patent don't say anything about great-great-grandchildren of the sovereign. What they say is that "the children of any Sovereign of these Realms, and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign, and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title, or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour." Then it goes on to say that male-line great-grandchildren of the sovereign are styled as if they were the sons of dukes. There's nothing in there for a hypothetical grandchild of William born during the Queen's reign.
__________________

  #1162  
Old 04-06-2011, 03:03 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: central valley, United States
Posts: 675
So, if William and Catherine have daughters in the near future, they will be ladies but not princesses while QE2 is alive? And any 2nd or 3rd son would be a lord?Once Charles is king do they automatically turn into Princesses/princes? If QE2 outlives Charles would they not turn into Princesses/princes until William became King?
Same question about Harry - if he has daughters or sons they too would be ladies/lords until Charles became king and thereafter princesses/princes? And if the Queen outlived Charles and William becomes King after her, then Harry's hypothetical daughters/sons would never be princesses/princes- even if William had no children?
Seems odd to me, as they'd be ahead of Eugenie and Beatrice in the succession but have lesser titles.
__________________

  #1163  
Old 04-06-2011, 03:14 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson View Post
The 1917 letters patent don't say anything about great-great-grandchildren of the sovereign. What they say is that "the children of any Sovereign of these Realms, and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign, and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title, or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour." Then it goes on to say that male-line great-grandchildren of the sovereign are styled as if they were the sons of dukes. There's nothing in there for a hypothetical grandchild of William born during the Queen's reign.
It is not really difficult to adapt Letters Patents to new situations. So I guess if need be, the Queen will simply adapt the 1917 Letters Patent to modern times with very long living souverains with lots of children, grand-children, great-grand-children aso.
  #1164  
Old 04-06-2011, 04:55 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist View Post
There seems to be a general mood to keep things [relatively] low-key. Catherine is to arrive at WA in a car, albeit a Rolls Royce, rather than a coach. Prince Harry is going to be 'Best Man', the term in more general use in [Commoner] weddings, rather than the more royal term 'supporter'. To me - and this is my personal opinion - I just get the feeling that The Queen, who is on occasions very sensitive to prevailing public moods, might just decide that creating Prince William a Duke [however much I feel he is entitled to it] is a bit - how do you say - insensitive [not the best word, but you hopepfully can see where I am coming from] when there seems to be a more general trend [speaking theoretically of course] towards equality.
How about; No fairy tale coach simply because Catherine doesn't want one? When you talk of royalty I think the word equality can be used very very rarely. Prince Henry being known as a "Best Man" probably has something to do with the title itself, being a supporter in the wedding would probably hurt Henry's pride.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist View Post
the reason for the Middletons' generous gesture was to make a public demonstration that not everything had to come from public funds.
And you know that how?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist View Post
.
With regard to possible titles, since the grant of a Royal Dukedom on the Wedding day could perhaps cause controversy because of the current state of the country, one possibility might be that the Queen defers granting Williams a Dukedom until (say) the Royal Couple are expecting their first child.

The mood in England is a bit - dare I say it - a bit Republican at the moment due to the recession and job losses, and altough none of this whatsoever can be placed at the door of William and Catherine, there is still this aura that any display of pomp and or privilege is wrong. To me, it is more important that we get through the wedding day without the threatened disruption and protests.
What controversy? What republican mood? I see no 'mood' except for some idiots who kick up a fuss every now and again but would never actually do anything?
Display pomp and privelige is wrong? Has anyone actually said that about this wedding, or the current monarchy? Every year minus 2 I believe, the Queen has travelled to open parliament in a gold coach wearing a very fancy dress and wearing the biggest piece of pomp I have ever seen and has anyone kicked up a fuss about that ceremony?
People talk of the recession as getting everyone down in the dumps and hating so called displays of money, but if you go out on a friday night you see couples/families eating out at restaurants going to the cinema, people going out on a saturday night to party. Everywhere I look the recession hasn't affected anyone, they have got on with their lives and are dealing with the financial situation how they can.

Why defer a title, when people are pretty much going to know that it is inevitable anywhere. This recession isn't going to go away in the next year or so unless the government wins a secretly lottery. If Catherine gets pregnant on her wedding night and gives birth in December of this year, do you think this recession/republican mood you speak of will have disappeared enough for them to be granted a title then?



Quote:
Originally Posted by sndral View Post
So, if William and Catherine have daughters in the near future, they will be ladies but not princesses while QE2 is alive?
That's correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sndral View Post
And any 2nd or 3rd son would be a lord?Once Charles is king do they automatically turn into Princesses/princes? If QE2 outlives Charles would they not turn into Princesses/princes until William became King?
The 2nd and 3rd will be Lords until Charles is King, and if QE2 outlived Charles she may think of changing the Letters Patent but that's how it would be I think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sndral View Post
Same question about Harry - if he has daughters or sons they too would be ladies/lords until Charles became king and thereafter princesses/princes? And if the Queen outlived Charles and William becomes King after her, then Harry's hypothetical daughters/sons would never be princesses/princes- even if William had no children?
Seems odd to me, as they'd be ahead of Eugenie and Beatrice in the succession but have lesser titles.
They too would be Lord and Ladies, until Charles becomes King then they would come under the category of "male line grandchildre" so would be styled HRH, whether Harry wishes that is a different matter.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #1165  
Old 04-06-2011, 04:57 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by sndral View Post
So, if William and Catherine have daughters in the near future, they will be ladies but not princesses while QE2 is alive? And any 2nd or 3rd son would be a lord?Once Charles is king do they automatically turn into Princesses/princes? If QE2 outlives Charles would they not turn into Princesses/princes until William became King?
Same question about Harry - if he has daughters or sons they too would be ladies/lords until Charles became king and thereafter princesses/princes? And if the Queen outlived Charles and William becomes King after her, then Harry's hypothetical daughters/sons would never be princesses/princes- even if William had no children?
That's correct, unless the Queen (or William in the last case) decided to issue letters patent making them princes/princesses (her father did the same thing for her first two children, as female-line grandchildren of the king wouldn't ordinarily be prince(sse)s).
  #1166  
Old 04-06-2011, 07:05 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
How about; No fairy tale coach simply because Catherine doesn't want one? When you talk of royalty I think the word equality can be used very very rarely. Prince Henry being known as a "Best Man" probably has something to do with the title itself, being a supporter in the wedding would probably hurt Henry's pride.




And you know that how?



What controversy? What republican mood? I see no 'mood' except for some idiots who kick up a fuss every now and again but would never actually do anything?
Display pomp and privelige is wrong? Has anyone actually said that about this wedding, or the current monarchy? Every year minus 2 I believe, the Queen has travelled to open parliament in a gold coach wearing a very fancy dress and wearing the biggest piece of pomp I have ever seen and has anyone kicked up a fuss about that ceremony?
People talk of the recession as getting everyone down in the dumps and hating so called displays of money, but if you go out on a friday night you see couples/families eating out at restaurants going to the cinema, people going out on a saturday night to party. Everywhere I look the recession hasn't affected anyone, they have got on with their lives and are dealing with the financial situation how they can.

Why defer a title, when people are pretty much going to know that it is inevitable anywhere. This recession isn't going to go away in the next year or so unless the government wins a secretly lottery. If Catherine gets pregnant on her wedding night and gives birth in December of this year, do you think this recession/republican mood you speak of will have disappeared enough for them to be granted a title then?





.



Just read this response to my post! Goodness! My first day as a newbie and I feel that the tone of the response [to which I will be replying to after work] seems rather aggressive. Lumutqueen doesn't seem to be using very courtly language.

Can someone tell me if this sort of treatment of fellow posters is usual?

Oh Dear, I thought I had joined a friendly forum, not an aggressive one.

Alex
  #1167  
Old 04-06-2011, 07:37 AM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
Royal Wedding: What title will William take? - Telegraph
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
  #1168  
Old 04-06-2011, 07:52 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist View Post
Just read this response to my post! Goodness! My first day as a newbie and I feel that the tone of the response [to which I will be replying to after work] seems rather aggressive. Lumutqueen doesn't seem to be using very courtly language.

Can someone tell me if this sort of treatment of fellow posters is usual?

Oh Dear, I thought I had joined a friendly forum, not an aggressive one.

Alex
We do like to think of the BRF as a friendly forum that thrives on the diversity of perspectives that posters bring. Not everybody will always agree with everything that is said, and occassionally responses do get a little heated, but I do hope you will not think of this as an aggressive forum.

I (and I am sure most posters) always enjoy well reasoned and logical arguments that have been thought through. I have enjoyed your posts, and I do hope you will not be put off.
  #1169  
Old 04-06-2011, 09:59 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson View Post
The 1917 letters patent don't say anything about great-great-grandchildren of the sovereign. What they say is that "the children of any Sovereign of these Realms, and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign, and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title, or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour." Then it goes on to say that male-line great-grandchildren of the sovereign are styled as if they were the sons of dukes. There's nothing in there for a hypothetical grandchild of William born during the Queen's reign.
Oh in that case, I stand corrected. :) But I'll bet if this kind of situation, as unlikely as it might happen, occurs, the Queen would probably issue or amend the LP for this kind of case, as someone else already mentioned.

Thanks again!
  #1170  
Old 04-06-2011, 10:12 AM
texankitcat's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist View Post
Just read this response to my post! Goodness! My first day as a newbie and I feel that the tone of the response [to which I will be replying to after work] seems rather aggressive. Lumutqueen doesn't seem to be using very courtly language.

Can someone tell me if this sort of treatment of fellow posters is usual?

Oh Dear, I thought I had joined a friendly forum, not an aggressive one.

Alex
This is a friendly forum, however we can all disagree at times and voice our opinions. I think Lamutqueen brought up some valid points to what you posted and although I understand you took exception to the tone, it was completely unecessary to post what you did above.
  #1171  
Old 04-06-2011, 10:37 AM
Susanna Wynne's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Jackson Hole, United States
Posts: 266
Dear Diarist:

As someone who is relatively new who has been chastened for an opinion by other posters (and I am not referring to moderators), I understand your concern. Most responders get that these are opinions, and as such, reasonable minds can disagree. Please do not be put off, because your knowledge makes your posts quite interesting. There are only a few who get a bit steamy in their disagreements, but for the most part, people are reasonably civil.
  #1172  
Old 04-06-2011, 10:41 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by texankitcat View Post
This is a friendly forum, however we can all disagree at times and voice our opinions. I think Lamutqueen brought up some valid points to what you posted and although I understand you took exception to the tone, it was completely unecessary to post what you did above.
Actually this is why i really like coming here. Whenever someone makes a statement, its not unusual at all be asked 'what's your source?" "how do you know that?" etc. It makes not only for a forum where the discussions get very interesting, it also makes what information that does come out in discussions reliable and not fragments of illumination. Of course we all tend to believe that when the source is a tabloid such as the DM and NotW and such, they're not known to be overly reliable and we take it as such. Now if I was to make a statement such as "Savannah has six toes" you can bet your bottom doughnut I'm going to be asked "and you know this how?" Clarification and backing up statements with sources are what makes TRF different than many message boards.
  #1173  
Old 04-06-2011, 11:01 AM
texankitcat's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Actually this is why i really like coming here. Whenever someone makes a statement, its not unusual at all be asked 'what's your source?" "how do you know that?" etc. It makes not only for a forum where the discussions get very interesting, it also makes what information that does come out in discussions reliable and not fragments of illumination. Of course we all tend to believe that when the source is a tabloid such as the DM and NotW and such, they're not known to be overly reliable and we take it as such. Now if I was to make a statement such as "Savannah has six toes" you can bet your bottom doughnut I'm going to be asked "and you know this how?" Clarification and backing up statements with sources are what makes TRF different than many message boards.
Savannah has six toes? NO! Where did you read that?

I absolutely agree. We are all adults here and individuals with our own thoughts, experiences and opinions. If this forum only allowed people to post the most solicitous flowery comments that agree with others opinions, then we probably wouldn't be here. Debating is healthy and gives people something to think about from both sides.
  #1174  
Old 04-06-2011, 11:25 AM
texankitcat's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 702
You know I always assumed that any son or daughter of a Royal Prince automatically becomes a Prince or Princess at birth. It's very interesting to discover that is not the case. I learn something new here every day!
  #1175  
Old 04-06-2011, 11:42 AM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by texankitcat

This is a friendly forum, however we can all disagree at times and voice our opinions. I think Lamutqueen brought up some valid points to what you posted and although I understand you took exception to the tone, it was completely unecessary to post what you did above.
If the poster felt the post was aggresive he should be allowed to comment as I am sure the original poster did not mean for the post to come off that way- sometimes things being read come off harsher then then intended.....but agree we do disagree and I do enjoy hearing the diffferent opinions/facts/and thoughts of posters..... sometimes they seem heated but I like to think with few exceptions noone means any offense :)

I also believe plp were told about the Queen,Charles, and the Middletons paying in order to offset any negative press in this bad economy as to way taxpayers are footing the bill and that's pretty common sense IMO- it's PR .......of course family will pay but they could have not annouced that at all but within seconds of engagement many were saying who's gonna pay for this wedding? There is nothing wrong with a bit of PR :) and it's the truth so even better!
  #1176  
Old 04-06-2011, 12:03 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 3,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by texankitcat View Post
I absolutely agree. We are all adults here and individuals with our own thoughts, experiences and opinions. If this forum only allowed people to post the most solicitous flowery comments that agree with others opinions, then we probably wouldn't be here. Debating is healthy and gives people something to think about from both sides.
Very well said.

As to the Queen granting William a title, I have to agree with Lumutqueen. I honestly don't see why there would be controversy about it.
  #1177  
Old 04-06-2011, 12:08 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,331
Okay let's get back on topic.

As a reminder...if anyone has any concerns please contact any of the TRF moderators and/or Administrators via Private Message.

Zonk
TRF Administrator
__________________
.

  #1178  
Old 04-06-2011, 03:04 PM
Susanna Wynne's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Jackson Hole, United States
Posts: 266
Whether to name William to a duchy or not is not on the face of it an issue, for either is correct, although the former is a long-standing tradition. It just seems from what I read that everything is being rethought, especially where William is concerned, in terms of p.r. And he seems to want to be seen as very modern, so a dukedom just for the sake of a dukedom might seem to him somewhat antiquated.

I, for one, am intrigued to see what will be done in this matter, for if they do not give him a duchy, it will be an indication of change -- and of his determination to forge a different path for the monarchy. But at this point, it is anyone's guess...
  #1179  
Old 04-06-2011, 03:30 PM
texankitcat's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, United States
Posts: 702
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRSJ View Post
If the poster felt the post was aggresive he should be allowed to comment as I am sure the original poster did not mean for the post to come off that way- sometimes things being read come off harsher then then intended.....but agree we do disagree and I do enjoy hearing the diffferent opinions/facts/and thoughts of posters..... sometimes they seem heated but I like to think with few exceptions noone means any offense :)

I also believe plp were told about the Queen,Charles, and the Middletons paying in order to offset any negative press in this bad economy as to way taxpayers are footing the bill and that's pretty common sense IMO- it's PR .......of course family will pay but they could have not annouced that at all but within seconds of engagement many were saying who's gonna pay for this wedding? There is nothing wrong with a bit of PR :) and it's the truth so even better!
I have no problem with the interpretation, just the manner in which it was addressed.

I heard that the Middletons offered to pay for the wedding dress, but hadn't heard about any other part of the costs for the receptions. It makes sense that they would offer to contribute towards the reception wedding/reception since they would have paid for her wedding anyway if she was marrying a non-royal.
  #1180  
Old 04-06-2011, 03:32 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 11,331
The topic is a potential Title for William and Catherine.

Topic PLEASE
__________________

__________________
.

Closed Thread

Tags
duke, prince william & catherine middleton wedding, titles, william & kate wedding


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit birthday catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week president nieto; state visit prince alexander of sweden prince bernhard prince charles prince joachim princess eugenie fashion princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 sonja state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:34 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises