Order of Precedence 1: Ending 2022

[Frothy]

Here is a question of divorcee precedence I am not sure of. Anybody know the answer?

What is the correct style of the divorced wife of the younger son of a peer who has a courtesy title?

EG: Lord Alexander Smith marries Jane Bloggs. Now she is Lady Alexander Smith. What if they divorce?

For an ordinary man, Mrs. John Smith becomes Mrs. Jane Smith. But to call her 'Lady Jane Smith' would indicate she was the daughter of a marquis. So how is she styled?

 

[Elspeth]

Well, Lady Colin Campbell is still referred to by that name even though she's divorced.

 

[Frothy]

Referred to by herself by that name - she trades on the title - but I do not believe she is entitled to it. If Lord Colin should remarry, his wife would be Lady Colin. I don't think there can be two of them!

Lady CC is actually what got me thinking about this a few years back - and this is the forum to find out the answers, if any!

 

[branchg]

Sarah was not technically HRH Princess Andrew, Duchess of York because Andrew was never HRH Prince Andrew, Duke of York. While we are getting techincal, direct sons and daughters of the monarch have 'the' before their names if they have no senior titles. The day before his marriage, Andrew was HRH The Prince Andrew, not Prince Andrew. Furthermore, when he became Duke of York he ceased to be referred to as the Prince Andrew, having acceded to a higher dignity. His correct title is not HRH the Prince Andrew Duke of York, it is simply HRH the Duke of York.

Are you saying that a dukedom is a higher dignity than a prince of the UK with the style of HRH? That's ridiculous. Andrew is HRH the Prince Andrew, Duke of York. He is a prince of the UK granted a secondary dukedom as a son of the Sovereign. His wife reflected his dignity as HRH Princess Andrew, Duchess of York and nothing else. Sarah was a princess, NOT a duchess, while married.

This is the critical point you keep missing. Diana and Sarah reflected their husbands, who were sons of the Sovereign as Princes of the UK. They also hold secondary titles and dignities such as Duke of York, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Baron Killeaney, etc; A divorce means you are no longer a Princess of the UK nor a duchess, countess, etc; held in subsidiary with the primary dignity of HRH. That is different than a regular dukedom in the peerage. They are not dukes, but princes and HRH.

 

[Elspeth]

Referred to by herself by that name - she trades on the title - but I do not believe she is entitled to it.

Have the Campbells said anything about it?

Was Princess Margaret referred to as Princess Margaret or Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon, after her divorce?

 

[branchg]

Have the Campbells said anything about it?

Was Princess Margaret referred to as Princess Margaret or Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon, after her divorce?

Officially, she remained HRH the Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowden after her divorce and until her death. I would assume she chose to retain a style related to her former husband as the mother of Lord Linley and Lady Sarah, similar to wives retaining their divorced surname if they have children from the marriage.

 

[branchg]

Well, Lady Colin Campbell is still referred to by that name even though she's divorced.

Technically incorrect because she is no longer the Lady Campbell.

For example, if Miss Anna Jones marries Lord John Smith, she becomes Lady Anna Smith. Upon divorce, she would be Anna Jones, Lady Smith as the former wife of a peer.

This is why Frothy's assertions on Diana and Sarah are incorrect. A royal princess by marriage loses all titles and status held through their husband upon divorce. Diana thus became Lady Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah is technically Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York with divorce.

With divorce, any titles acquired through marriage become a style, similar to a regular surname.

 

[Sancia]

I've a question, but I'm not sure of this (taking the exemple of the French society, don't know how it's in UK).

When Marie Dupont marries Jean Granger in France, in an old-fashioned way, she's madame Jean Granger. But more and more women want to be known, in this case, like madame Marie Granger, or shorter Marie Granger. If they divorce, they will be known like madame Marie Dupont. The same of some (very few)vwomen of the french aristocracy.

In UK, does it often happen that, for example, Mary Smith, who married duke John Campbell, wants to be known as duchess Mary Campbell? Technically, would it be correct?

In France, given the fact we have no more official aristocracy, a comtesse Jean Dupont (Marie Thomas, wife of comte Jean Dupont) is only a use and the survivance of this old use in old-fashioned family. It has no legal existence (and on a strictly personnel plan it would hate to be known like madame Jean Dupont, or whatsoever). What's the point about this in UK? Thanks by advance.

 

[branchg]

I've a question, but I'm not sure of this (taking the exemple of the French society, don't know how it's in UK).

When Marie Dupont marries Jean Granger in France, in an old-fashioned way, she's madame Jean Granger. But more and more women want to be known, in this case, like madame Marie Granger, or shorter Marie Granger. If they divorce, they will be known like madame Marie Dupont. The same of some (very few)vwomen of the french aristocracy.

In UK, does it often happen that, for example, Mary Smith, who married duke John Campbell, wants to be known as duchess Mary Campbell? Technically, would it be correct?

In France, given the fact we have no more official aristocracy, a comtesse Jean Dupont (Marie Thomas, wife of comte Jean Dupont) is only a use and the survivance of this old use in old-fashioned family. It has no legal existence (and on a strictly personnel plan it would hate to be known like madame Jean Dupont, or whatsoever). What's the point about this in UK? Thanks by advance.

Well, given that the UK still has a class system based on a formal peerage and the ranking of dignities all the way up to the Crown, it is usually the desire of a lady to assume the titular dignities of her husband, if superior to her own, upon marriage. There is nothing in the law, however, to stop a woman from choosing not to and/or retaining their own name and status regardless.

In France, the Republican Government does not legally recognize any of the former titles of nobility, with the notable exception of the heads of the former royal houses of Orleans, Bonaparte and Bourbon. Each Head of the Royal or Imperial Houses are recognized by the Republic by their princely or ducal dignities and titles legally as descendants of former Sovereigns of France.

The rest of the former nobility continue to hold their dignities as courtesy titles, recognized by society, but not legally by the French Republic except as a surname (i.e. Rothschild).

 

[Elspeth]

Technically incorrect because she is no longer the Lady Campbell.

Do you know what she actually is? That was what Frothy was asking about originally. Georgie Ziadie, Lady Campbell?

 

[branchg]

Do you know what she actually is? That was what Frothy was asking about originally. Georgie Ziadie, Lady Campbell?

I don't know her actual name, but the style is correct for a divorcee.

 

[Sancia]

Well, given that the UK still has a class system based on a formal peerage and the ranking of dignities all the way up to the Crown, it is usually the desire of a lady to assume the titular dignities of her husband, if superior to her own, upon marriage. There is nothing in the law, however, to stop a woman from choosing not to and/or retaining their own name and status regardless.

In France, the Republican Government does not legally recognize any of the former titles of nobility, with the notable exception of the heads of the former royal houses of Orleans, Bonaparte and Bourbon. Each Head of the Royal or Imperial Houses are recognized by the Republic by their princely or ducal dignities and titles legally as descendants of former Sovereigns of France.

The rest of the former nobility continue to hold their dignities as courtesy titles, recognized by society, but not legally by the French Republic except as a surname (i.e. Rothschild).

Ok, thanks. For me who don't know anything about the class system in European monarchy, I never know, when someone is speaking of "technically correct", if it's correct regarding a law or a custom.

 

[Warren]

Pedant's Corner

Wishing to be pedantic I should point out that the correct 'spelling' is The Prince Andrew, The Princess Royal, The Queen, The Princess Margaret etc, not 'the'. My understanding is that 'The' is a dignity restricted to the Monarch(s) and their children.
.

 

[Frothy]

I already pointed that out

Branchq, I am not wrong. You clearly know an awful lot about royalty, and I really enjoy your posts, but you're wrong on this one, as a very quick check of any official document will bear out. You may check the Court Circular, available in any good paper daily. The title is HRH the Duke of York and only that, because a *royal* dukedom, which carries with it a Princely dignity, is higher than merely being a Prince of the United Kingdom; the Princess Royal is a higher title than The Princess Anne, and so forth.

Here is today's Court Circular:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,61-1709503_2,00.html

And here is the official website of Buckingham Palace: go to the drop down menu on 'choose a member of the Royal Family'. The correct and official titles are given there:

http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page7.asp

There is no HRH The Prince Andrew, Duke of York because there is no such title. There is only HRH The Duke of York.

Now as to your confusion. You appear to think that I am saying that a divorced Princess or Duchess is still a Princess or a Duchess. I am not. I am pointing out to you that as a matter of law and custom, a divorced peeress who has not remarried may still use the style of address of a peeress. Emma, Duchess of Argyll and the Duchess of Argyll are still both correctly addressed as "Your Grace", even though the first is only a former or divorced duchess.

Now, the reason both Diana and Sarah are not correctly addressed as Your Royal Highness was that the Queen, as fount of honour, as is her right, specifically barred them from using this royal designation.

But she did not specifically bar them from using the ordinary normal useage of a divorced peeress. Thus, they were entitled to use the highest form of address of the non-royal, lesser titles that attach to their former husbands. The Duke of Rothesay is a lesser title that attaches to the Princedom of Wales; HRH The Prince Charles did not become Duke of Rothesay upon birth but assumed it when he assumed the Princedom of Wales. just as he then also became Duke of Cornwall and many other things.

Diana was free to use the ordinary non-royal style of a divorced Duchess. Indeed that is *exactly* what happened to Wallis Simpson. The King as fount of honour decided she could not use the ordinary style of a Princess and Royal Duchess. Therefore, to her, the lesser and normal dignity of the lesser title of Duke applied. She was styled 'Your Grace' and her casket bears that out. To take away the right to an HRH does NOT take away the right to the lesser titles and dignity unless the monarch specifically says so.

And - at the risk of repeating myself - although a former Duchess is not a Duchess, she is still correctly styled Your Grace. A Royal Duchess is a Duchess, contrary to your assertion; she is also and first a Princess, and uses her Princely dignity first. But when that is not the case (as with Wallis) the lesser ducal dignity applies.

 

[Frothy]

Elspeth

Georgie Ziadie, Lady Campbell?

I honestly don't know. But that seems wrong too because it mimics the style of a divorced wife of a knight. Sir John Smith marries Mary Jones, she's Lady Smith. they divorce and she's Mary, Lady Smith (no need for any surname, just Mary, Lady Smith).

She was not Lady Campbell when married but Lady *Colin* Campbell.

My best guess, and it's only a guess, is Georgie, Lady Colin Campbell. I wonder if I can google the official answer, sometime!

 

[Warren]

More Pedantry

I already pointed that out.

I was referring to the correct capitalisation of 'The' as opposed to the inconsistent or occasional use of 'the'.

HRH The Prince Charles did not become Duke of Rothesay upon birth but assumed it when he assumed the Princedom of Wales. just as he then also became Duke of Cornwall and many other things.

"Charles succeeded as Duke of Cornwall and Duke of Rothesay etc on his mother's accession to the Throne; he was created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester on 26 July 1958." Source: Burke's Royal Families of the World Vol1.
Rothesay is a Scottish Dukedom and has no connection with the Principality of Wales.

ps... Posting on TRF is not a competition; we are here to share what we know and at the same time learn and clarify things we don't. We have all been corrected at some stage, and hopefully we accept it in good grace.

 

[tiaraprin]

Elspeth




I honestly don't know. But that seems wrong too because it mimics the style of a divorced wife of a knight. Sir John Smith marries Mary Jones, she's Lady Smith. they divorce and she's Mary, Lady Smith (no need for any surname, just Mary, Lady Smith).

She was not Lady Campbell when married but Lady *Colin* Campbell.

My best guess, and it's only a guess, is Georgie, Lady Colin Campbell. I wonder if I can google the official answer, sometime!

I heard that Lady Colin Campbell used to be a male and had an operation to become female?? If you look at Lady Colin Campbell, you could believe that.

 

[Frothy]

"Charles succeeded as Duke of Cornwall and Duke of Rothesay etc on his mother's accession to the Throne; he was created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester on 26 July 1958." Source: Burke's Royal Families of the World Vol1.
Rothesay is a Scottish Dukedom and has no connection with the Principality of Wales.

ps... Posting on TRF is not a competition; we are here to share what we know and at the same time learn and clarify things we don't. We have all been corrected at some stage, and hopefully we accept it in good grace.

LOL, whoops!

However, the substantive point remains that these are lesser titles not assumed upon birth, and real dukedoms. Charles is both Prince and Duke (and baron and earl come to that). The divorced wives of men in these situations can use the normal divorced styles of wives unless the monarch specifically bars it.

The only specific bar in Diana and Sarah's case is the use of the royal style, Her Royal Highness, and inclusion as a royal person. There is no bar to normal use of the style of a divorced duchess. Hence, 'Your Grace'.

At least - if there was a specific bar from using the lesser divorced styles as well as HRH I would like to hear it. Such a bar would seem most inconsistent with the official title of Sarah as Sarah, Duchess of York.

 

[Frothy]

It would be remiss of me not to admit that even if assumed on birth, lesser titles apply. There are plenty of courtesy titles of the aristocracy assumed on the birth of an eldest son that have multiple ranks within them. A Viscount may also be a Baron and so forth.

 

[branchg]

LOL, whoops!

However, the substantive point remains that these are lesser titles not assumed upon birth, and real dukedoms. Charles is both Prince and Duke (and baron and earl come to that). The divorced wives of men in these situations can use the normal divorced styles of wives unless the monarch specifically bars it.

The only specific bar in Diana and Sarah's case is the use of the royal style, Her Royal Highness, and inclusion as a royal person. There is no bar to normal use of the style of a divorced duchess. Hence, 'Your Grace'.

At least - if there was a specific bar from using the lesser divorced styles as well as HRH I would like to hear it. Such a bar would seem most inconsistent with the official title of Sarah as Sarah, Duchess of York.

Frothy,

Here is some information from the Baronage website which may help you understand the issue:

A divorced duchess continues to use her previous title, preceded by her christian name, but does so as if the title were a "surname"****. Lady Diana, Princess of Wales, is thus also Lady Diana, Duchess of Cornwall, and because the title is regarded merely as a name, the status held by the wife of a duke is lost, as is the prefix of a duchess ("Her Grace"). Accordingly, although it appears not yet to have been clearly explained by the Government to the general public, following the analogy of a divorced duchess, Lady Diana, Princess of Wales is no longer a princess, just as Lady Diana, Duchess of Cornwall is no longer an English duchess. The rank of princess came with marriage and it went when the marriage ended.

Click here to read the entire article:
http://www.baronage.co.uk/bphtm-01/royal-01.html

 

[branchg]

Diana was free to use the ordinary non-royal style of a divorced Duchess. Indeed that is *exactly* what happened to Wallis Simpson. The King as fount of honour decided she could not use the ordinary style of a Princess and Royal Duchess. Therefore, to her, the lesser and normal dignity of the lesser title of Duke applied. She was styled 'Your Grace' and her casket bears that out. To take away the right to an HRH does NOT take away the right to the lesser titles and dignity unless the monarch specifically says so.

And - at the risk of repeating myself - although a former Duchess is not a Duchess, she is still correctly styled Your Grace. A Royal Duchess is a Duchess, contrary to your assertion; she is also and first a Princess, and uses her Princely dignity first. But when that is not the case (as with Wallis) the lesser ducal dignity applies.

Wallis was specifically denied the rank of Royal Highness and Princess of the UK because George VI issued letters patent stating she (and any future children) would not share HRH Prince Edward's rank upon marriage. In effect, the King was making the marriage morganatic, even though it is clear there was no legal basis for doing so. However, as fount of honour, the King altered the style and title of a member of the royal family with the approval of the Government.

Thus, instead of being "HRH Princess Edward, Duchess of Windsor", Wallis was "Her Grace the Duchess of Windsor" as a result of the letters patent. If she had divorced Edward, she too would only have been entitled to the style "Wallis, Duchess of Windsor", and would not be addressed as "Your Grace" because she would no longer be a duchess.

 

[Frothy]

Branchq,

First of all that seems to be just a website at first - at least, it provides no links to back up its assertion that 'His/Her Grace' is a prefix and not a style. It certainly is a style; you address a Duke as 'Your Grace'. It's not an official website or something regarded as authoritative like Debrett's or Burke's, so without something out there which you may have - elsewhere - I can't agree that 'Your Grace' is a prefix. It's a title. I met a Duchess couple of weeks back and I called her Your Grace!

But maybe I have misunderstood what it's arguing?

Secondly you may have missed this part of the website which does back up my original point about Rothesay and Scots custom...

Diana will be Lady Diana, Duchess of Rothesay under Scots law, which treats divorced wives in the same way it treats widows

That means 'Your Grace', no? A dowager Duchess is always Your Grace. Unless - as you and I agree - the Queen took that honour away from her, since the Queen can do whatever she likes.

 

[Frothy]

Branch,

couple of extra points - I keep posting that I'm not arguing a divorced duchess is still a duchess, so can we move on from that. The question here is style, how you address a divorced duchess. Maybe it's not 'Your Grace', but I'd like to see something official to that effect.... maybe you've got a link. I mean, you could be right. I will see what I can find!

But if Scots law treats a divorcee like a widow, then the Rothesay title made her Your Grace, because the higher title of Royal Highness had been specifically barred by the Queen - but not all titles.

Secondly, did you happen to see the links I provided you from the Court Circular and buckingham Palace? There is no title HRH The Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor or HRH The Prince Andrew, Duke of York. The title is HRH The Duke of York. That is what the Palace styles him as officially. It is in their releases and on their website. The title used is always the *highest* title held by that person in the place that they are. Hence, HRH The Prince of Wales when he is in England, Wales or anywhere except Scotland, where he is officially HRH The Duke of Rothesay.

Interesting footnote is that in Scotland there is no differentiation between Charles' and Camilla's titles. They are officially TRH The Duke and Duchess of Rothesay when in Scotland.

 

[Frothy]

OK, I found it. Sarah is addressed as 'Duchess', and I do not know if 'Your Grace' is also appropriate. An actual Duchess is also addressed as 'Duchess' or 'Your Grace'. Whether you would say 'Your Grace' to a divorced *English* Duchess (Sarah) as opposed to a Scottish one (Diana) I do not know.

Edited to add: I just emailed Debrett's to ask.

 

[branchg]

That means 'Your Grace', no? A dowager Duchess is always Your Grace. Unless - as you and I agree - the Queen took that honour away from her, since the Queen can do whatever she likes.

What it means is that if Diana had remarried, under Scots law, she could have retained the STYLE of "Duchess of Rothesay" as part of her name. It does not mean she would be addressed as "Your Grace" because she is no longer "Duchess of Rothesay", but simply carrying a style similar to a surname.

Keep in mind that because Diana's titles and styles were royal, the Sovereign has the right to alter, change or deny the usual custom for divorcees. All precedence and dignity flows from the Crown.

We saw this with Diana due to her unique position as a divorcee of a Prince of Wales, but still the mother of a future king. She was granted privileges and honours by the Queen after the divorce that technically she was not entitled to receive as a divorcee. These were given to acknowledge her unique role.

 

[Frothy]

Here, we can agree - yay!

Keep in mind that because Diana's titles and styles were royal, the Sovereign has the right to alter, change or deny the usual custom for divorcees. All precedence and dignity flows from the Crown.

We saw this with Diana due to her unique position as a divorcee of a Prince of Wales, but still the mother of a future king. She was granted privileges and honours by the Queen after the divorce that technically she was not entitled to receive as a divorcee. These were given to acknowledge her unique role.

This may be why Sarah is still to be called 'Duchess' although I think this style very ugly. In fact, the utter hash the Palace is making of styles and titles these days saddens me immensely. Don't even get me started on a Royal Earldom (!).

I am sure Her Majesty is just being badly advised, but the English phrase 'dog's breakfast' is very apposite for what is being done with titles and with precedence in the RF today. The Camillia situation is in my view disastrous. I wish that Charles would have the bottle to simply say 'My wife will be known by her titles as Princess of Wales and, in due course, Queen'. The UK public might grumble at first but in the end they would respect his guts. Don't you think so branchq?

PS: do you know anything about heraldry?

 

[Frothy]

She was granted privileges and honours by the Queen after the divorce that technically she was not entitled to receive as a divorcee.

Yes. I believe the Palace suggested she be called 'Ma'am' which seemed like an awful fudge, symptomatic of title confusion in general. 'Ma'am' is what we use in addressing a Princess or a Queen after the first 'Your Majesty/Royal Highness'. Members of the royal family without royal rank are not called 'ma'am', eg Zara Philips.

 

[branchg]

There is no title HRH The Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor or HRH The Prince Andrew, Duke of York. The title is HRH The Duke of York. That is what the Palace styles him as officially. It is in their releases and on their website. The title used is always the *highest* title held by that person in the place that they are. Hence, HRH The Prince of Wales when he is in England, Wales or anywhere except Scotland, where he is officially HRH The Duke of Rothesay.

Interesting footnote is that in Scotland there is no differentiation between Charles' and Camilla's titles. They are officially TRH The Duke and Duchess of Rothesay when in Scotland.

It is normal custom and practice to refer to a peerage style of a prince of the UK once granted by the Sovereign. This is because the dukedom or earldom signifies a new style which will pass down to their descendants, who are royal, but not Royal Highness, after the death of the male-line prince/princesses. That does not change the fact they are correctly known as HRH the Prince Andrew/Edward, Duke of York/Earl of Wessex.

Prince Charles is correctly Duke of Rothesay when in Scotland because the title is a feudal one associated with the Crown. Similarly, he is correctly Duke of Cornwall when in the duchy because it remains a crown domain associated with the Crown.

Titles like Duke of York, Duke of Kent, Duke of Gloucester are dukedoms granted in the peerage to signify royal dignity for future descendants of the original holder, who is usually a Prince of the UK and a Royal Highness.

The original holder's status as a prince and royal highness always takes precedence over their status as a duke because it is simply a peerage.

 

[Elspeth]

She was not Lady Campbell when married but Lady *Colin* Campbell.

Yes, that's what I was wondering. This "Lady Campbell" business sounds like the wife of a knight or baronet or something.

On the other hand, wasn't Diana's paternal grandmother known as Ruth Lady Fermoy? To the best of my knowledge, she was a widow, not a divorcee.

 

[Elspeth]

I heard that Lady Colin Campbell used to be a male and had an operation to become female?? If you look at Lady Colin Campbell, you could believe that.

I'm not sure that she was actually male; a lot less was known about the biology of sexuality back in the mid-20th century. She was raised as a boy because she had some medical condition (which I used to know what it was called and am now totally blanking out) that made her sexuality unclear, and there weren't genetic tests back then. I think her parents pretty much had to make a decision whether to raise her as a son or daughter (this is playing merry hell with the use of personal pronouns!) and decided on the former for whatever reason.

It's quite possible that she was always a genetic female but raised as a boy. I'm just not remembering the details. I'm pretty sure it wasn't a matter of a simple sex-change operation, though.