Questions about British Styles and Titles 1: Ending 2022

[Skippyboo]

Possible Dukedom for Harry and Meghan

Edward can’t get the Edinburgh Dukedom until the deaths of his parents because he isn’t the direct heir. There isn’t any Dukedom to give Harry after Charles becomes King that can’t be given in May. Why have the Queen given him an Earldom and then have Charles give him a Dukedom afterwards when the Queen could just do it in May.

 

[Somebody]

That is indeed a difference but the most relevant example I could find... Although I would consider his father's passing an argument against granting prince Edward his ducal titles instead of an argument in favour (as they never were children of a monarch - while Harry hopefully will be). They could easily have waited until their brother George became king (which ended up being 6 months after Edward was granted his titles) but king George II didn't see a reason to wait.

I am in no way saying that the Queen will grant Harry a ducal title for certain (as times change - for example she doesn't grant upon majority of age but upon marriage - and she'll might take other things into consideration, such as Edward's title, future titles of Harry's children etc) but there clearly is a precedent of granting monarch's grandsons by the prince of Wales a ducal title.

 

[Denville]

That was from an ignorant tabloid. It is actually a very old title.

ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WessexWessex was an Anglo-Saxon kingdom in the south of Great Britain, from 519 until England was unified by Æthelstan in the early 10th century.

Yes I do know... but it is not a title that has been used in Lord knows how long...
It was an unusual choice..
As for Edward's choosing it, its been said on this forum that Edward asked for that title because it was in the Shakespear film. I hope that is not true..

 

[Mbruno]

Yes I do know... but it is not a title that has been used in Lord knows how long...
It was an unusual choice..
As for Edward's choosing it, its been said on this forum that Edward asked for that title because it was in the Shakespear film. I hope that is not true..

According to the Wikipedia, the last holder of the title before Edward lived in the 11th century ! Maybe i am underestimating Edward's knowledge, but I doubt he would have thought about having that particular title if it had not been used by a fictional character in the Shaskepeare in Love film .

 

[Ish]

According to the Wikipedia, the last holder of the title before Edward lived in the 11th century ! Maybe i am underestimating Edward's knowledge, but I doubt he would have thought about having that particular title if it had not been used by a fictional character in the Shaskepeare in Love film .

Earls of Wessex before Edward wasn't exactly a minor figure though - I would expect Edward to have heard of him. The last Anglo-Saxon King of England was Harold Godwinson, Earl of Wessex. His death at the Battle of Hastings is one of the most significant events in English history. Edward would have had to have been a very poor student to not know his name.

 

[Denville]

I would not say that Edward was excptioanally clever but I don't believe he would have asked for the title from a movie. Its possible that someone at court suggested this rather unusual and old title, its not exacly one that the RF have used in a long time or IMO were likely to think of. I'm not sure how much it has "clung" to Edward.. I think he and his wife tend to be referred to as Edward and Sophie..

 

[Skippyboo]

Possible Dukedom for Harry and Meghan

Baby Cambridge can become Duke of Cambridge or maybe York. William will most likely be King by the time he marries so Cambridge will be free. York may also be free if Andrew has passed.

Also Lord Wessex was the bad guy in Shakespeare in Love so why would you pick your title from the bad guy.

 

[Mbruno]

Baby Cambridge can become Duke of Cambridge or maybe York. William will most likely be King by the time he marries so Cambridge will be free. York may also be free if Andrew has passed.

If William has another son, he probably won't get married for another 30 years as people tend to get married at an older age these days. Prince Andrew would be close to 90 years old by then, but he could still be alive, so we don't know if York will be available.

 

[jacqui24]

Baby Cambridge can become Duke of Cambridge or maybe York. William will most likely be King by the time he marries so Cambridge will be free. York may also be free if Andrew has passed.

Also Lord Wessex was the bad guy in Shakespeare in Love so why would you pick your title from the bad guy.

Don’t they usually wait longer as the Princesses of York are still likely to be alive in 30 years.

 

[Pranter]

When they marry don't they give up the York title?


LaRae

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Earls of Wessex before Edward wasn't exactly a minor figure though - I would expect Edward to have heard of him. The last Anglo-Saxon King of England was Harold Godwinson, Earl of Wessex. His death at the Battle of Hastings is one of the most significant events in English history. Edward would have had to have been a very poor student to not know his name.

And Edward did study history at University.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Let's not forget that Andrew is single and could remarry a much younger woman at any age and have a son to inherit that title. It has happened many times before.

The York princesses will always be 'of York' but the practice adopted by Princess Alexandra was to stop using 'of Kent' officially although she still gets that informally quite a lot especially in some of the less well-educated media outlets.

The tradition though is that while ever there is anyone alive who had used the title of 'of xxxx', except where the holder became King, that the title isn't reissued in their lifetime.

 

[Mbruno]

When they marry don't they give up the York title?


LaRae

Yes, they do, They will be known as HRH Princess Beatrice/Eugenie, [ husband's title or Mrs. Husband's family name if untitled]

 

[wyevale]

Thus, upon marriage HRH Princess Alexandra of Kent became HRH Princess Alexandra, the Hon, Mrs Angus Ogilvy [Angus Ogilvy was an hon, as the 2nd son of an Earl.].
When he was later knighted, she became HRH Princess Alexandra, the Hon Lady Ogilvy.

 

[Mbruno]

Let's not forget that Andrew is single and could remarry a much younger woman at any age and have a son to inherit that title. It has happened many times before.

The York princesses will always be 'of York' but the practice adopted by Princess Alexandra was to stop using 'of Kent' officially although she still gets that informally quite a lot especially in some of the less well-educated media outlets.

The tradition though is that while ever there is anyone alive who had used the title of 'of xxxx', except where the holder became King, that the title isn't reissued in their lifetime.

The 1917 Letters Patent only say that a sovereign's grandchild in male line has the dignity of Prince (or Princess by analogy); there is no reference whatsoever to territorial designation.

I suppose the the tradition of calling the monarch's grandchildren "Prince XXX of [territorial designation of father's title] was in line with the French custom where the "enfants de France" (i. e. the King's children and the children of the Dauphin) were simply "XXX of France" whereas the "petits-enfants de France" (i e the children of a "fils de France" other than the Dauphin) were "xxxx of [ territorial designation of father's peerage]" , e. g. " of Anjou", " of Orléans" etc.

If we apply the French logic, where the territorial designation is in practice a proxy for family name ( which the HRHs do not use), then it makes sense that, when a Princess marries and, therefore, "changes family" ( by the patrilineal criteria; sorry fellow Swedish or Dutch posters), she should also drop her father's territorial designation and take her husband's name or title instead. At least that is how I interpret it, but maybe the Brits think differently.

 

[Stefan]

The tradition though is that while ever there is anyone alive who had used the title of 'of xxxx', except where the holder became King, that the title isn't reissued in their lifetime.

With Edinburgh they did not wait because in 1847 still Princess Beatrice the youngest daughter of Alfred, Duke of Edinbrugh and Duke os Saxe-Coburg and Gotha was alive.

 

[RoyalHighness 2002]

With Edinburgh they did not wait because in 1847 still Princess Beatrice the youngest daughter of Alfred, Duke of Edinbrugh and Duke os Saxe-Coburg and Gotha was alive.

Yes, but by that time of Edinburgh had become a secondary terrritorial designation since her father became the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha which has higher precedence over his Edinburgh title since S-C and G was an ancient ruling duchy not a mere British peerage. She was also the wife of a Spanish Infante at the time, so she took on his title as well.

 

[cepe]

The 1917 Letters Patent only say that a sovereign's grandchild in male line has the dignity of Prince (or Princess by analogy); there is no reference whatsoever to territorial designation.

I suppose the the tradition of calling the monarch's grandchildren "Prince XXX of [territorial designation of father's title] was in line with the French custom where the "enfants de France" (i. e. the King's children and the children of the Dauphin) were simply "XXX of France" whereas the "petits-enfants de France" (i e the children of a "fils de France" other than the Dauphin) were "xxxx of [ territorial designation of father's peerage]" , e. g. " of Anjou", " of Orléans" etc.

If we apply the French logic, where the territorial designation is in practice a proxy for family name ( which the HRHs do not use), then it makes sense that, when a Princess marries and, therefore, "changes family" ( by the patrilineal criteria; sorry fellow Swedish or Dutch posters), she should also drop her father's territorial designation and take her husband's name or title instead. At least that is how I interpret it, but maybe the Brits think differently.

Agree - Princess Alexandra ceased to be Princess Alexandra of Kent upon her marriage.

 

[Iluvbertie]

What should happen - and does 'officially' isn't the same as what happens with the general public.

That means that Beatrice and Eugenie will be the 'York' princesses for the rest of their lives - even if they do marry and officially drop the 'of York' in things like the CC.

That is why I don't think York will be used again while they are alive. Unless they were to marry a prince of somewhere else and thus be a Princess of xxx through marriage they will always been seen as 'of York' to the masses. These are the same people who can't get their heads around the fact that Diana was never Princess Diana or that Kate is a Princess but that Duchess is a higher styling because it comes from a peerage title while Princes/Princesses in the UK are commoners.

The people who frequent a site like this understand these things because they are interested but the majority will go with the 'easiest' option, even if it isn't correct.

 

[cepe]

I don't think the general public think of them as "of York". They are just Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie. Its people on Forums who know them as "of York"

If the York title becomes available I think it will be used, probably by William if he has another son.

We can always reopen that debate after April and the birth of Cambridge#3. If its a girl it wont matter.

 

[royal rob]

I don’t think the general public think about them much at all. Except to look at their hats etc.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Every time I see any mention of the York girls it is exactly that 'the York's' not by name. I get the impression most people don't even know their names but know they are the York girls or the Yorks - or those wastrels etc.

 

[Countessmeout]

Every time I see any mention of the York girls it is exactly that 'the York's' not by name. I get the impression most people don't even know their names but know they are the York girls or the Yorks - or those wastrels etc.

That's the impression I get as well. Especially as when people do try and say their names, they often are not sure which one is which. They are just generally grouped as the 'yorks'.

But considering the only press they get is for their holidays, the public can be forgiven for not recognizing them as more. Grouped in with their parents.

 

[cepe]

the PUBLIC in the UK dont have a clue - the media and people on here do.

But not surprised by your responses

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I don't think the general public think of them as "of York". They are just Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie. Its people on Forums who know them as "of York"

If the York title becomes available I think it will be used, probably by William if he has another son.

We can always reopen that debate after April and the birth of Cambridge#3. If its a girl it wont matter.

Andrew is only 57--he could possibly live another 30 years. I doubt they would reuse it within months or a year or two of his death should Cambridge #3 (if a boy) marry at 30.

 

[sndral]

...
3. There is a quiet push amongst a number of women for equal inheritance laws for titles - meaning Beatrice could legally be able to inherit York (or the Queen could issue new LPs recreating the Duke of York for Andrew to allow Beatrice to inherit - maybe as a wedding present for Beatrice - who knows)

I wondered before William’s wedding if the Queen would make his dukedom inheritable by his first born irrespective of their sex, but she chose to go w/ the traditional male heirs. It’ll be interesting to see how she handles inheritance w/ Harry’s dukedom or earldom, if she sticks with male primogeniture I don’t think she’ll retroactively change Andrew’s even though he is rumored to be her favorite.
Wonder if Charles will go w/ oldest born irrespective of sex, we may not know until one his grandchildren marries.

 

[Countessmeout]

I wondered before William’s wedding if the Queen would make his dukedom inheritable by his first born irrespective of their sex, but she chose to go w/ the traditional male heirs. It’ll be interesting to see how she handles inheritance w/ Harry’s dukedom or earldom, if she sticks with male primogeniture I don’t think she’ll retroactively change Andrew’s even though he is rumored to be her favorite.
Wonder if Charles will go w/ oldest born irrespective of sex, we may not know until one his grandchildren marries.

William's really didn't matter anyways. Unless William dies before he comes to the throne, it wont be inherited by anyone. It will merge with the throne. So the queen likely saw no reason to consider inheritance.

Now that the line to the throne has been made equal, I'd not be surprised if not the queen, then Charles, makes changes to future titles made.

 

[hel]

TBH, I don't know that the Queen would consider making royal ducal titles inheritable by daughters. Primarily because the (at the time considered unnatural) inequity in her own marriage caused a great deal of strife for her and Phillip and she might well not want to chance inflicting that on Beatrice (or a potential Sussex/Clarence/TBD firstborn daughter).

 

[Ish]

I wondered before William’s wedding if the Queen would make his dukedom inheritable by his first born irrespective of their sex, but she chose to go w/ the traditional male heirs. It’ll be interesting to see how she handles inheritance w/ Harry’s dukedom or earldom, if she sticks with male primogeniture I don’t think she’ll retroactively change Andrew’s even though he is rumored to be her favorite.
Wonder if Charles will go w/ oldest born irrespective of sex, we may not know until one his grandchildren marries.

The Queen can't retroactively change Andrew's titles though. She could issue new titles that had equal inheritance, or even allowed for female inheritance but still preferred male inheritance, but she couldn't retroactively change the Duke of York title.

 

[Gawin]

I don't think the general public think of them as "of York". They are just Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie. Its people on Forums who know them as "of York"

If the York title becomes available I think it will be used, probably by William if he has another son.

We can always reopen that debate after April and the birth of Cambridge#3. If its a girl it wont matter.

Now that the succession to the crown is no longer dependent on gender I suppose it's possible Charlotte and any younger sisters might be created Duchesses, especially if attitudes toward royal daughters change within the next twenty or thirty years.