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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #901  
Old 03-28-2013, 08:55 AM
principessa's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Schweinfurt, Germany
Posts: 2,635
My guesses are: Duke and Duchess of Clarence, Earl and Countess of Dunbar and Baron and Baroness Folliott

Their children will be known as Prince/ss NN of Clarence.
__________________

__________________
I had a dream: Let's connect our thoughts together, than we have a mission, let's connect our feelings together, than we have a mood, let's connect our dreams together, than we have a vision and let's connect our mission, our mood and our vision together than we have a perfect life.
Reply With Quote
  #902  
Old 03-28-2013, 09:43 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro and Petrópolis, Brazil
Posts: 1,124
My guess is the Dukedom of Sussex.

They will Their Royal Highness the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

I believe (but I'm not 100% sure) that the Queen will issue Letter of Patent saying their children will be Princes and Princesses.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #903  
Old 03-28-2013, 11:48 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire View Post
I believe (but I'm not 100% sure) that the Queen will issue Letter of Patent saying their children will be Princes and Princesses.
Why would she do that? When she issued the LPs regarding William's children it basically just addressed the fact that under the system one of William's children (his eldest son) will be a prince, but his other children won't. As he's the heir it made sense to make an exception for him, especially as the succession laws are in the process of being changed.

Harry's children aren't going to be in the direct line of succession and none of them will be granted a title over anyone else. So why make an exception and issue LPs granting them titles during Elizabeth's reign?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #904  
Old 03-28-2013, 12:42 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro and Petrópolis, Brazil
Posts: 1,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
Why would she do that? When she issued the LPs regarding William's children it basically just addressed the fact that under the system one of William's children (his eldest son) will be a prince, but his other children won't. As he's the heir it made sense to make an exception for him, especially as the succession laws are in the process of being changed.

Harry's children aren't going to be in the direct line of succession and none of them will be granted a title over anyone else. So why make an exception and issue LPs granting them titles during Elizabeth's reign?
Who knows what the Queen has in mind? Soon or later, Prince Harry's children will be the Monarch's grandchildren, so, I see no problem in Her Majesty giving Royal titles to them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #905  
Old 03-28-2013, 01:19 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 348
If the queen doesn't, they will gain the title when Charles is king anyways, as male line grandchildren of the monarch. As it is Will who will be king when his kids wed, it will stand to be seen how Harry's younger kids will be titled. His eldest will gain Harry's dukedome (if a son) when Harry dies. Harry's younger kids may very well just be left as Prince/Princess (like Prince Michael and Princess Alexandra) and not given a duchy on marriage. It may have been different IMO, if their grandfather was king when they wed.

I can see Duke and Duchess of Sussex. And their children will be Lord/Lady, and the eldest what ever Harry's Earl title is, until Charles is king IMO.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #906  
Old 03-28-2013, 01:25 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro and Petrópolis, Brazil
Posts: 1,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
As it is Will who will be king when his kids wed, it will stand to be seen how Harry's younger kids will be titled.
Will be the same situation of Queen's first cousins.

Let's say Prince Harry will have three children, like the late Duke of Kent:

If he has sons, the eldest will inherit his Dukedom, like the current Duke of Kent.

The other two will be Prince/Princess X of Y.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #907  
Old 03-28-2013, 04:58 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
Not necessarily. Edward was created an Earl with the expectation that he will one day be the Duke of Edinburgh (once the title reverts to the crown). Why not create Harry an Earl upon his marriage, with the expectation that he will be created Duke of York once the title becomes extinct?
Because that mightn't happen - Andrew could marry at any time in the future a woman able to give him a son who would inherit the title - and that might just be the incentive for him to do so.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #908  
Old 03-28-2013, 04:59 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire View Post
My guess is the Dukedom of Sussex.

They will Their Royal Highness the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

I believe (but I'm not 100% sure) that the Queen will issue Letter of Patent saying their children will be Princes and Princesses.
I think if she was going to do that she would have done so when she adjusted the LPs for William's children.


With Edward's children not taking HRHs I expect Harry's to do the same thing - knowing how the public object to Beatrice and Eugenie having HRH and Harry's children will be in the same position.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #909  
Old 03-28-2013, 05:00 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire View Post
Who knows what the Queen has in mind? Soon or later, Prince Harry's children will be the Monarch's grandchildren, so, I see no problem in Her Majesty giving Royal titles to them.
That is not a given - Charles may predecease his mother in which case they wouldn't be the monarch's male line grandchildren.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #910  
Old 03-28-2013, 06:06 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post

Because that mightn't happen - Andrew could marry at any time in the future a woman able to give him a son who would inherit the title - and that might just be the incentive for him to do so.
And it also might not happen that Edward becomes the Duke of Edinburgh - it depends on the title merging with the crown while Edward is still alive and whoever is on the throne at the moment deciding to follow through with recreating the title for Edward.

My point wasn't that "Andrew can't have a son" so much as "at this point it seems unlikely, so why not follow the Edinburgh example."
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #911  
Old 03-28-2013, 06:12 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
And it also might not happen that Edward becomes the Duke of Edinburgh - it depends on the title merging with the crown while Edward is still alive and whoever is on the throne at the moment deciding to follow through with recreating the title for Edward.

My point wasn't that "Andrew can't have a son" so much as "at this point it seems unlikely, so why not follow the Edinburgh example."
Possibly because there are likely still to be 2 Princesses "of York" living who would not be the children of HRH Prince Henry, Duke of York whose own children would also become "of York".
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #912  
Old 03-28-2013, 06:20 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Possibly because there are likely still to be 2 Princesses "of York" living who would not be the children of HRH Prince Henry, Duke of York whose own children would also become "of York".
You are correct of course, but it made me smile as the rest of us manage with the same surnames in the family
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #913  
Old 03-28-2013, 06:45 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,083
I totally get the "of York" issue (and think when it comes down to it, it's a better argument than "Andrew could still have a son").

Question though, will the girls still be "of York" when they're married? I know when I make a generalization in reference to the Queen's cousins I say the Gloucesters and Kents and obviously include Princess Alexandra, but is she still technically "of Kent"? I've only ever seen her (post marriage) without it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #914  
Old 03-28-2013, 06:51 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro and Petrópolis, Brazil
Posts: 1,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
I totally get the "of York" issue (and think when it comes down to it, it's a better argument than "Andrew could still have a son").

Question though, will the girls still be "of York" when they're married? I know when I make a generalization in reference to the Queen's cousins I say the Gloucesters and Kents and obviously include Princess Alexandra, but is she still technically "of Kent"? I've only ever seen her (post marriage) without it.
No, when a Prince gets a Dukedom, he ceases to use the "surname" from his father's title (the Duke of Cambridge is no longer "Prince William of Wales").

Similarly, when a Princess marry, she ceases to use the "surname", and starts to use her husband title or surname (like Princess Alexandra, the Honorable Lady Ogilvy).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #915  
Old 03-28-2013, 07:41 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post

I think if she was going to do that she would have done so when she adjusted the LPs for William's children.

With Edward's children not taking HRHs I expect Harry's to do the same thing - knowing how the public object to Beatrice and Eugenie having HRH and Harry's children will be in the same position.
I agree. I think Harry's children will be Lord/Lady Mountbatten-Windsor even after Charles is King.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #916  
Old 03-28-2013, 07:50 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Maybe yes, maybe no. I don't believe it is a requirement to use the husbands name at all. Princess Margaret for instance was never Mrs Armstrong Jones, it wasn't until Tony received a peerage that she started calling herself Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon.
Also there are no guarantees that the York princesses will marry or add their husbands names to their descriptions.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #917  
Old 03-28-2013, 08:11 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro and Petrópolis, Brazil
Posts: 1,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Maybe yes, maybe no. I don't believe it is a requirement to use the husbands name at all. Princess Margaret for instance was never Mrs Armstrong Jones, it wasn't until Tony received a peerage that she started calling herself Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon.
Princess Margaret always liked to be different.

But Princess Elizabeth became Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh; Princess Alexandra of Kent became Princess Alexandra, the Honorable Mrs. Ogilvy; and Princess Anne became Princess Anne, Mrs. Phillips.

Princess Margaret was the exception, not the rule.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #918  
Old 03-28-2013, 08:29 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,083
There's also the fact that Princess Margaret wasn't "of" anything prior to her marriage, so she had nothing to drop.

Her official title would have been HRH The Princess Margaret, Mrs. Armstrong-Jones, but she chose not to use the "Mrs. Armstrong-Jones." I doubt she would have simply remained (had she still held it at the time) Princess Margaret of York upon her marriage.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #919  
Old 03-28-2013, 08:36 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro and Petrópolis, Brazil
Posts: 1,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
its late here and I havent slept in 48 hours - chronic insomnia, but unless I have completely lost my marbles PRincess MArgaret became Countess of Snowdon on her marriage. So there is no difference between her and Princess Anne or Princess Alexandra.

In each case their title has HRH Princes XXXXX, (Husbands Title).

What have I missed? Be kind cos I'm very tired now.
Anthony Armstrong-Jones was only received the title of Earl of Snowdon in 1961.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #920  
Old 03-28-2013, 08:39 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrazilianEmpire View Post
Anthony Armstrong-Jones was only received the title of Earl of Snowdon in 1961.
Thank you I've rdeleted my message cos I remembered it was about 18 months after the wedding. Sorry.
__________________

__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
prince harry, prince william, styles and titles


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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events diana dutch royal history engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]