Prince William and Catherine Middleton Possible Titles

[Diarist]

You're certainly right about the trend away from Royal Dukedoms. However because Prince William is a Heir Apparent (behind his father), he will probably get one on his marriage, and WILL get one once his Dad becomes King (he inherits the Duchy of Cornwall), while other members, including Prince Harry might not a dukedom (especially after it's clear he will probably not ascend to the throne because Prince William have children) because they're not as close to the Throne.

Again you're right that they want to lead a more normal life, but being a Duke isn't going to get in the way of doing that though. One of the main reason he may get a Dukedom is so Catherine won't have to be called Princess William (officially anyway), but can be called by Duchess of X (or Countess of X or the feminine form of whatever title Prince William get).

I should point out though that Prince Edward is really not in the line to get Dukedom of Edinburgh, as it can only go to Prince Charles. There's a thread about that on the top level of British Royalty forum.

And before I forget, welcome!

Thank you for your welcome, Royal Eagle.

I fully agree that Prince Edward is NOT automatically in line to get the Dukedom of Edinburgh - it will revert to the Crown on the death of the DoE. I will go and look at the other thread. I did research this topic quite thoroughly - I have to have a working knowledge of Royal Titles in my profession.

Thanks again for the kind welcome

Alex

 

[Royal_Eagle]

Sorry, I appear not to have made my point clearly enough - I fully accept that Catherine will be made HRH, the point I was tyring to make is that use of this honorific is not actually automatic - using the Duchess of Windsor as an example. Yes, you are quite right, of course it reflected anger and I am not disputing this, I was just trying to explain that the HRH is in the nature of being in the gift of the queen.

Alex

Ah, got your point. Hmm, I had the impression it was pretty much automatic under the existing LPs, unless the monarch override the LPs. In other words, if the Queen don't say anything otherwise, then she'd become HRH automatically, not something to be given/granted explicitly.

 

[Susanna Wynne]

I agree with Diarist. The young royal couple seem to want to be more 'normal' and a dukedom at this time might not be in their vision of themselves. Who knows, of course, what the queen will actually do -- and what W and K prefer.

Since a dukedom or two (Cornwall and Rothesay) are firmly in his future, I'm wondering if the powers that be might think it insensitive to have another one given him right now. And he is so well and widely known as Prince William... JMHO, of course, and we'll just have to wait a few weeks to find out.

 

[Diarist]

I am quite sure that some of the papers will refer to Catherine as Princess Catherine or Princess Kate, in exactly the same way that they did with 'Princess Diana' and 'Princess Di'. [Just to make it quite clear, I fully accept and realise this is very very wrong, it is just the way of the Press!]

Alex

 

[texankitcat]

I do not think that Catherine will be made a princess in her own right. For a start, it is not the custom of the British Royal Family to honour new members in this way.

As to whether Prince Williams is made a Royal Duke, could I, with appropriate humility as this is my first post, make a couple of points?

1. To me, there seems to be a slight trend to moving away from creating Royal Dukes; when Prince Edward was about to be married, there was speculation that he would be created Duke of Sussex / Cambridge etc. In the end, as we know, he was created Earl of Wessex, which I think took most royal watchers by surprise, not only because he was not created a Royal Duke [although he is in line to inherit the title of Duke of Edinburgh when that title reverts to the Crown on the death of his father] but also because Wessex was not an existing English County.

My second reason is this: Prince William is currently a serving RAF Officer. Over the past few months, I have detected another trend, namely for him to be living very much more of what I will have to call a 'private' type of life in his 'non-royal working life'. For example, a few weeks ago, it was recorded that Prince William and Catherine [when at their home in Wales] like to 'look after themselves' and do not wish to have staff. It is also a fact that they have been seen doing their own shopping in nearby towns and villages etc. This, if you think about it, is quite a departure from the traditional way that newly-married royalty has conducted their lives in even the more recent times.

Of course we cannot know what is in the Queen's mind, but I would not be totally surprised if the young couple are not given such a formal 'handle' right at the start of their married life together. The Queen will of course be able to bestow whatever Royal Title she feels appropriate at at an appropriate time - this might, for example, be at the end of Prince William's immediate service career as a serving officer or perhaps when the couple have children.

Alex

Welcome Diarist!

My understanding is that Prince Edward requested the title of Earl of Wessex because he particularly liked the name being a fan of the movie Shakespere in Love. From what I also understand it was discussed that he will get the Duke of Edinburgh title when the DOE passes even though it reverts to the Crown. The Queen I believe can bestow the title on one of her sons other than the Prince Charles. If this is not the case I am sure someone will correct this.

Regarding William and Kate's title. For a couple that want to keep a low key profile, they are popping up quite a bit for functions as a couple. Clearly this is to get Kate's feet wet in performing royal duties, however since it not really necessary until after they are married and want to start taking on Royal duties, it may be that they will be more active than previously thought. I don't see their title after marriage as having any bearing on keeping a low profile if that is what they intend to do. He IS second in line to the throne, so he can't avoid the duties that come along with his position for long and kate fe does deserve the benefits and prestige of being the wife of a high ranking Royal IMO.

 

[Diarist]

I don't see why anyone would call Catherine that if she becomes The Duchess or Countess of X. The media called Diana that because she was "Lady Di" in the press before she married and became Princess of Wales. She was never styled as a Duchess or Countess.

.

Except that she was: One of Prince Charles' titles is 'Earl of Chester'; when the couple were in that part of England, they were sometimes referred to as 'TRH The Earl and Countess of Chester'. Indeed, the local hospital [in its rebuilt form was opened by the Princess] was actually named 'The Countess of Chester' Hospital, the name by which it is still known.

Alex

 

[Diarist]

Welcome Diarist!

My understanding is that Prince Edward requested the title of Earl of Wessex because he particularly liked the name being a fan of the movie Shakespere in Love. From what I also understand it was discussed that he will get the Duke of Edinburgh title when the DOE passes even though it reverts to the Crown. The Queen I believe can bestow the title on one of her sons other than the Prince Charles. If this is not the case I am sure someone will correct this.

Regarding William and Kate's title. For a couple that want to keep a low key profile, they are popping up quite a bit for functions as a couple. Clearly this is to get Kate's feet wet in performing royal duties, however since it not really necessary until after they are married and want to start taking on Royal duties, it may be that they will be more active than previously thought. I don't see their title after marriage as having any bearing on keeping a low profile if that is what they intend to do. He IS second in line to the throne, so he can't avoid the duties that come along with his position for long and kate fe does deserve the benefits and prestige of being the wife of a high ranking Royal IMO.

Thank you for the kind welcome, texankitkat. [If I may go off point just for a moment, I am truly overwhelmed by the kind welcomes I have received as I have only been a member for a very short time..]

Back on topic: I accept all you say; there is only one another point that is lurking at the back of my mind, and it is this: at the moment, this is a bit of a difficult time for the UK. The recession has bitten very deeply and there are cuts being made to public services. There is a general feeling of austerity in the air. My own personal feeling at the moment is that this is having an effect on the mood of people: I look back to wedding of The Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer, a time of huge public joy.

With a month before the wedding of Prince Charles, it is not just hyperbole to say that I remember it was a time of huge excitement - every day people were actually talking excitedly about 'fairy tale coaches' etc etc. Huge street parties were being planned etc etc. Now, to me, when I compare the mood of the country a month before this Royal Wedding, it seems that the public mood is more questioning about the forthcoming celebrations. 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. There was also the announcement that Mr and Mrs Middleton would be contributing financially to the costs of the wedding and it was officially stated that the Queen had been pleased to accept this offer; the reason for the Middletons' generous gesture was to make a public demonstration that not everything had to come from public funds. [This is in some respects a bit of a moot point, because Royal Weddings include a lot of funding from what is more correctly the Queen's own money rather than just Civil List / Public money]. Contrast and Compare this with 30 years ago, when the feeling amongst the people was that the young couple deserved everything that money could buy etc etc


Saddest of all is the spoken threat by anarchists that they 'intend to disrupt the Royal Wedding'. I just wonder whether the Queen might therefore feel that to grant William another title might be regarded as fanning the flames.

Alex

 

[Zonk]

Please refer all discussion regarding the title of Duke of Edinburgh to this thread, http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/the-future-of-the-duke-of-edinburgh-title-24343.html

Thank you!

 

[Royal_Eagle]

Back on topic: I accept all you say; there is only one another point that is lurking at the back of my mind, and it is this: at the moment, this is a bit of a difficult time for the UK. The recession has bitten very deeply and there are cuts being made to public services. There is a general feeling of austerity in the air. My own personal feeling at the moment is that this is having an effect on the mood of people: I look back to wedding of The Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer, a time of huge public joy.

With a month before the wedding of Prince Charles, it is not just hyperbole to say that I remember it was a time of huge excitement - every day people were actually talking excitedly about 'fairy tale coaches' etc etc. Huge street parties were being planned etc etc. Now, to me, when I compare the mood of the country a month before this Royal Wedding, it seems that the public mood is more questioning about the forthcoming celebrations. 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. There was also the announcement that Mr and Mrs Middleton would be contributing financially to the costs of the wedding and it was officially stated that the Queen had been pleased to accept this offer; the reason for the Middletons' generous gesture was to make a public demonstration that not everything had to come from public funds. [This is in some respects a bit of a moot point, because Royal Weddings include a lot of funding from what is more correctly the Queen's own money rather than just Civil List / Public money]. Contrast and Compare this with 30 years ago, when the feeling amongst the people was that the young couple deserved everything that money could buy etc etc

Alex

Very insightful comments, Alex. While I've thought it was likely that the Queen would make Prince William a Duke, it wouldn't surprise me too much if at the request of the Prince himself, that he be made a lower peer (Earl, etc) or even not bother with a new title at all. So far it seems the main reason people think he'd (or should) get a new title is for Catherine's sake, so she wouldn't be called officially Princess William but by some other title, even if newspapers are going to get it wrong and call her Princess Catherine or Princess Kate.

They have always strike me as very level-headed couple who don't care all that much for the various pomps and circumstance, but do understand the importance of tradition, etc.

So my bet(s) are that 60% probability Prince William get a Dukedom, 20% he get some lesser peerage and 20% nothing.

 

[Osipi]

Sorry, I appear not to have made my point clearly enough - I fully accept that Catherine will be made HRH, the point I was tyring to make is that use of this honorific is not actually automatic - using the Duchess of Windsor as an example. Yes, you are quite right, of course it reflected anger and I am not disputing this, I was just trying to explain that the HRH is in the nature of being in the gift of the queen.

Alex

In the case of the Duchess of Windsor however, there were special letters patent drawn up at the time specifically stating that she would not share her husband's royal rank. This was a special case and more info about it is in the Duke and Duchess of Windsor thread here. In all other cases, the wife of a HRH does automatically become HRH upon marriage.

 

[Diarist]

In the case of the Duchess of Windsor however, there were special letters patent drawn up at the time specifically stating that she would not share her husband's royal rank. This was a special case and more info about it is in the Duke and Duchess of Windsor thread here. In all other cases, the wife of a HRH does automatically become HRH upon marriage.

I don't think we are at cross-purposes at all here Osipi; the very fact that the Princely title [such term including (in the case of a female) a princess] is entirely at the Will of the Sovereign is demonstrated clearly by the denial by George VI of the Princely title 'Royal Highness' to the Duchess of Windsor.

Thus what will make Catherine HRH [something] will be due to the fact that Her Majesty won't deny Catherine the right to the honorific.

Alex

 

[Osipi]

I don't think we are at cross-purposes at all here Osipi; the very fact that the Princely title [such term including (in the case of a female) a princess] is entirely at the Will of the Sovereign is demonstrated clearly by the denial by George VI of the Princely title 'Royal Highness' to the Duchess of Windsor.

Thus what will make Catherine HRH [something] will be due to the fact that Her Majesty won't deny Catherine the right to the honorific.

Alex

This is the kind of thing that totally fascinates as well as can totally befuddle me at times. I think the only thing that will totally annoy me after the wedding is if anyone refers to Kate as Kate Middleton as I've seen the DoC referred to still as Camilla Parker-Bowles.

This also brings to mind that if William and Kate are created the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, we here at TRF will have to do more typing.
For now using DoC usually denotes the Duchess of Cornwall.

 

[Diarist]

This is the kind of thing that totally fascinates as well as can totally befuddle me at times. I think the only thing that will totally annoy me after the wedding is if anyone refers to Kate as Kate Middleton as I've seen the DoC referred to still as Camilla Parker-Bowles.

This also brings to mind that if William and Kate are created the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, we here at TRF will have to do more typing.
For now using DoC usually denotes the Duchess of Cornwall.

Don't be worried about the befuddlement, Osipi. Lots of journalists from even the better UK papers get muddled with titles and precedent - and, dare I say it, some of the less experienced staff at the Palace get muddled, too.

Biggest problems appear to be failure to understand the use of the title 'Lady' and also the failure to distinguish Marquess from Marquis. I'm quite fortunate because I deal with this sort of distinction in my work and so I get used to it. For others, it's quite a battle.

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.

Alex

Alex

 

[Sherlock221B]

Don't be worried about the befuddlement, Osipi. Lots of journalists from even the better UK papers get muddled with titles and precedent - and, dare I say it, some of the less experienced staff at the Palace get muddled, too.

Biggest problems appear to be failure to understand the use of the title 'Lady' and also the failure to distinguish Marquess from Marquis. I'm quite fortunate because I deal with this sort of distinction in my work and so I get used to it. For others, it's quite a battle.

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.

Alex

Alex

What type of controversy would it cause? What pomp and privilege as a duke would be on display that isn't already on display by him being a prince?

I do not believe he wants a private life...case in point he just became a royal colonel Irish Guards...a very discreet position wouldn't you agree? And there maybe less street parties but

 

[branchg]

I don't think we are at cross-purposes at all here Osipi; the very fact that the Princely title [such term including (in the case of a female) a princess] is entirely at the Will of the Sovereign is demonstrated clearly by the denial by George VI of the Princely title 'Royal Highness' to the Duchess of Windsor.

Thus what will make Catherine HRH [something] will be due to the fact that Her Majesty won't deny Catherine the right to the honorific.

While it's true that in the strict sense of the word, the style remains within the gift of The Sovereign, in reality, the 1937 Letters Patent denying Wallis equal rank upon marriage were not consistent with common law and practice.

It was rightfully hers automatically as the wife of a son of The Sovereign, which The Duke remained legally under the 1917 Letters Patent once the Act of Abdication was passed. The UK never recognized morganatic marriage until 1937.

 

[Sherlock221B]

What type of controversy would it cause? What pomp and privilege as a duke would be on display that isn't already on display by him being a prince?

I do not believe he wants a private life...case in point he just became a royal colonel Irish Guards...a very discreet position wouldn't you agree? And there maybe less street parties but

...quite a few more tea parties as a result of the exponential increase in television, or should I say media converge of this royal wedding compared to thirty years ago. JMHO...

 

[texankitcat]

Don't be worried about the befuddlement, Osipi. Lots of journalists from even the better UK papers get muddled with titles and precedent - and, dare I say it, some of the less experienced staff at the Palace get muddled, too.

Biggest problems appear to be failure to understand the use of the title 'Lady' and also the failure to distinguish Marquess from Marquis. I'm quite fortunate because I deal with this sort of distinction in my work and so I get used to it. For others, it's quite a battle.

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.

Alex

Alex

I don't understand what a title has to do with austerity. Is there some added cost to UK citizens if Prince William was granted a title of Duke that I am not aware of?

 

[Americanskipper]

I suspect Prince William will get a title upon his marriage, but if he does not, what title, if anything, would his children have? I know only his eldest son would get HRH. His other children (along with the children of Prince Henry) would not get HRH until Prince Charles comes to the throne. But if William (and Henry) were not to be made Dukes until after they become fathers, what title would their children have? Would their children (as great grand children of the monarch) still have no title? Therefore (this seems silly but) could you have a non-titled commoner (William's eldest son) be styled HRH?

 

[Royal_Eagle]

I suspect Prince William will get a title upon his marriage, but if he does not, what title, if anything, would his children have? I know only his eldest son would get HRH. His other children (along with the children of Prince Henry) would not get HRH until Prince Charles comes to the throne. But if William (and Henry) were not to be made Dukes until after they become fathers, what title would their children have? Would their children (as great grand children of the monarch) still have no title? Therefore (this seems silly but) could you have a non-titled commoner (William's eldest son) be styled HRH?

All Heir Apparents (that is, the eldest son of the eldest son of..... all the way up to the Monarch) will always have the HRH and Prince style, according to the LPs 1917, I believe. All other children would get one of their Dad's courtesy titles or whatever great-grandchildren of the Monarch get. So no matter what happens, William's first son will be HRH and carry the title of Prince. 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. All other children and grandchildren of Prince William, unless granted by future LPs, etc, will not carry any titles or styles.

At least that's how I understand things. Of course someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[texankitcat]

All Heir Apparents (that is, the eldest son of the eldest son of..... all the way up to the Monarch) will always have the HRH and Prince style, according to the LPs 1917, I believe. All other children would get one of their Dad's courtesy titles or whatever great-grandchildren of the Monarch get. So no matter what happens, William's first son will be HRH and carry the title of Prince. 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. All other children and grandchildren of Prince William, unless granted by future LPs, etc, will not carry any titles or styles.

At least that's how I understand things. Of course someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

The Queen appears to be in good health, however in 30 years she will be 115. Highly doubtful she will live that long.

 

[wbenson]

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.

 

[sndral]

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.

 

[Kataryn]

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.

 

[Lumutqueen]

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.

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?

.
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?

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.

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.

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.

 

[wbenson]

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).

 

[Diarist]

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

 

[georgiea]

Royal Wedding: What title will William take? - Telegraph

 

[muriel]

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.

 

[Royal_Eagle]

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!

 

[texankitcat]

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.