Questions about British Styles and Titles 1: Ending 2022

[Zonk]

Let's move on and keep race out of this discussion.

 

[padams2359]

I think if they decide in private they will not, it'll be announced now. See my post about concerns when Charles becomes king and the likelihood that he's going to want Camilla as Queen. NOT a good time to announce both issues. Although, can the Queen's Will apply to something that won't happen until she passes?

I believe the discussion between QE2, Charles and the Sussexes as to if and when they are, or are not HRHs and when. I also believe it is the same scenario with Harry not being a Garter Knight, and I think there is an opening, right now. I think the decision was made the Harry would be Charles’s first Garter Knight. So it take 5 or 10 years. What is that time frame in 1000 years of history. These people have the ability to look at things in a picture so big, that many of us just can’t wrap our minds around what they are a part of, and how they view their place in that picture.

 

[duchessrachel]

oh for heaven’s sake. Princess Anne never turned down Royal titles for her children-you would think the British Press would be better informed.
Makes one wonder what else they’ve gotten wrong.

I did not realize that Princess Anne did not turn titles down. I know this is not the thread to discuss this, so could you direct me to where I can learn the facts about Peter and Zara not getting titles. I would love to read about it. Thanks.

I wouldn't believe anything from the media about this.



LaRae

I agree. I read that this morning and said to myself, "Well, that's one more thing they are manufacturing for clicks."

 

[Rudolph]

Roya Nikkhah and The Sunday Times are royal friendly and usually very reliable. A lot of times Roya’s exclusives come directly from KP.

 

[duchessrachel]

I wouldn't be surprised if the couple chooses to have their kids be styled as that of a Duke. That was always the one reason I thought an LP wouldn't be issued. Due to the wishes of the parents.

Harry has struggled with his role in the past. He's debated whether he wants a royal role for himself. But it was his respect for the Queen, and I do think seeing how much impact he can have, that ultimately led to his decision to stay. It's still a balancing act to this day. Omid and Emily were just talking about how protective he is over Meghan. And I do agree with Omid that it's not just because of the baby. It was obvious well before there was a baby. He's well aware of the downside of the role.

I also think his struggles there had to do with the mental health issues he had due to his mother's death. When he began dealing with those and seeing just what kind of effect his royal role would allow him to have, he embraced it. It will be interesting to see what titles the Sussex children will have, if any. I do harbor a hope that that the Queen will issue LP for them to be Princes and Princesses.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I did not realize that Princess Anne did not turn titles down. I know this is not the thread to discuss this, so could you direct me to where I can learn the facts about Peter and Zara not getting titles. I would love to read about it. Thanks.

I'll look for something else, but here is a start--

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a12775724/british-princess-royal-title-meaning/

Before Princess Anne, her great aunt Princess Mary married Earl of Harewood-their children were only styled as children of an Earl. Her aunt Princess Margaret's children were also only styled as children of an Earl.

I'll private message you any further reading I find.

 

[TLLK]

Oh, I don't believe a word coming from the media about this. It's too early for one, and secondly, I doubt they'd discuss this with anyone but the Queen.

Actually I believe that the Sussexes would discuss this topic with QEII and the future monarchs, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge. ?

 

[jacqui24]

I believe the discussion between QE2, Charles and the Sussexes as to if and when they are, or are not HRHs and when. I also believe it is the same scenario with Harry not being a Garter Knight, and I think there is an opening, right now. I think the decision was made the Harry would be Charles’s first Garter Knight. So it take 5 or 10 years. What is that time frame in 1000 years of history. These people have the ability to look at things in a picture so big, that many of us just can’t wrap our minds around what they are a part of, and how they view their place in that picture.

One has nothing to do with each other. The first Garter Knight is always the consort. I do believe Charles would like to at least bestow that honor on one of his own children. And Harry is a royal, so there is no issue of space availability.

 

[Osipi]

Actually I believe that the Sussexes would discuss this topic with QEII and the future monarchs, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge. ?

Most definitely as it will be their reigns that this decision will affect the most.

 

[jacqui24]

I also think his struggles there had to do with the mental health issues he had due to his mother's death. When he began dealing with those and seeing just what kind of effect his royal role would allow him to have, he embraced it. It will be interesting to see what titles the Sussex children will have, if any. I do harbor a hope that that the Queen will issue LP for them to be Princes and Princesses.

I wouldn't put that on mental health issues. While it had an impact, I don't believe that's all it is. The fact of the matter is, with or without his mother and what happened to her, there are lot of good and bad things that comes with this role. The intrusion and abuse are real. I think Harry made it very clear the downside of this role when he issued that statement in 2016. I don't believe it was the scenario he wished for when his relationship came to light. However, the situation got to a point where he could no longer just ignore it.

 

[LauraS3514]

Different times, different expectations. It was unthinkable a generation ago that two blood princess wouldn't be working royals, but here we are with Bea and Eugenie. .

Princess Beatrice opened a neonatal ward in Laos today but it won't be in the Court Circular as she's not a "working royal." The people of Laos may disagree: a British Princess opened their hospital.

 

[Gawin]

So if I'm understanding all of this correctly, the only working royal generation Charles wants to be slimmed down is that which will be under his reign. It is not a system set in stone and will revert back to including collateral grandchildren of the monarch once William ascends?

We don't know. That's the reason why the issue keeps coming up. Andrew's children are HRHs but not working royals. Edward's children aren't even HRHs. So we're all waiting to see what the plan is for Harry's. According to the 1917 Letters Patent they will be Earl/Lord/Lady at birth and HRH when Charles becomes King but the monarch can override the LP as the Queen did with Edward's children and William's too. Stay tuned along with the rest of us....

 

[FashionMaven]

I too wonder if their child(ren) will be styled as that of a child of a Duke for now and then become Prince/Princess after Charles becomes King.

Is that a foregone conclusion that they automatically become HRH once Charles is King? Are Edward and Sophie's kids HRH's?

 

[jacqui24]

Is that a foregone conclusion that they automatically become HRH once Charles is King? Are Edward and Sophie's kids HRH's?

The LP in 1917 says they are. Edward and Sophie's children were made as an exception, which was announced on their wedding day.

 

[Gawin]

I do chuckle when Americans, often SO keen on 'equality', and from a country where Titles are 'verboten' have a hissy fit at the mere possibility that a child of [part] American descent might [just] be denied a 'Royal Highness'..

I chuckled when I started discussing the BRF with a co-worker from England and quickly discovered (1) he was a republican and (2) I knew (and cared) much more about them than he did. Almost as if we were switched at birth.... [emoji1]

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Is that a foregone conclusion that they automatically become HRH once Charles is King?

Are Edward and Sophie's kids HRH's?

Unless new Letters Patent are issued, yes any children of Harry's will automatically become HRH Prince/Princess the moment Charles ascends the throne.

No, because at the time of Edward & Sophie's wedding it was made known that any future children would use the courtesy titles of the children of an Earl.

 

[Delsia]

What Would Camilla Title BE

Full disclosure, I love history and Jewelry, that being said I became interested in the BRF when Diana, Princess of Wales married Charles. When they divorced, I was not a fan of Prince Charles and Camilla. However with age and life experience I am so glad that Charles and Camilla were finally able to marry. He, she, they are so right for each other I would wish they were able to marry when they met except for the fact the William, Harry, Tom and Laura would not exist nor their children which would be a tragedy.

Being that Prince Charles implied that Camilla would be Princess Consort instead of Queen Consort which she should be, what would be her title if Queen Elizabeth died, Charles became King and Camilla died shortly afterward but before Charles was Crowned.

What would her title be, in that Charles had not been crowned and BP had not made any statement regarding how she would be addressed?

 

[Osipi]

Its simple. Charles becomes King at the moment Queen Elizabeth draws her last breath and with that, his wife becomes Queen Consort legally. Even should it be deemed that Camilla would be known as Princess Consort, legally, she would still be Queen Consort. Just like Camilla is now legally The Princess of Wales but has been chosen to be known as The Duchess of Cornwall.

The coronation is the affirmation and blessing of a King and his consort (if applicable) but kingship starts at the very moment of the death of the previous monarch.

 

[Delsia]

Osipi, I know legally that she would be Queen Consort, what I'm asking is if she were to die before BP had put out a statement regarding her title what would she be called in death, by the Monarchy King Charles, the papers tabloid included and the public?

 

[Iluvbertie]

When Charles becomes King - which as Osipi has said will be the instant the Queen dies - Camilla becomes Queen.

At his accession council, later that day or the next day, he may ask the government of the day to pas the necessary legislation to strip her of that title so he can issue LPs for her to be Princess Consort - or use some other mechanism.

Her only title, as the wife of the King, is Queen.

As the wife of the Prince of Wales she had a choice of may titles but as the wife of the King there is only one title for her.

Mr Blair made it clear, in 2005, that she would be Queen and the only way to deny her that title was by legislation. That means that the first thing that has to happen once Charles is King is for the parliament to pass legislation demoting his wife. It may even need legislation in all the realms that have to pass their own legislation which could be fun.

 

[Gawin]

Full disclosure, I love history and Jewelry, that being said I became interested in the BRF when Diana, Princess of Wales married Charles. When they divorced, I was not a fan of Prince Charles and Camilla. However with age and life experience I am so glad that Charles and Camilla were finally able to marry. He, she, they are so right for each other I would wish they were able to marry when they met except for the fact the William, Harry, Tom and Laura would not exist nor their children which would be a tragedy.

Being that Prince Charles implied that Camilla would be Princess Consort instead of Queen Consort which she should be, what would be her title if Queen Elizabeth died, Charles became King and Camilla died shortly afterward but before Charles was Crowned.

What would her title be, in that Charles had not been crowned and BP had not made any statement regarding how she would be addressed?

Legally she'll be Queen the moment Charles becomes King, even before he's crowned, but it appears she might not be required to use that title. For example, right now she's legally Princess of Wales but is known by one of Charles's other titles instead. So IMO if Charles doesn't issue a statement between his mother's death and Camilla's then Camilla's title would be Queen (Consort).

 

[Delsia]

That's what I wondered, if they would go through with the paperwork to demote her to Princess Consort or allow her to be buried with her rightful title of Queen Consort.

 

[Gawin]

That's what I wondered, if they would go through with the paperwork to demote her to Princess Consort or allow her to be buried with her rightful title of Queen Consort.

I believe she would need to be formally created Princess Consort before she could use that title since "Prince Consort" wouldn't be one of Charles's titles. But I could be wrong. As King, Charles might have the right to simply decide the title she is known by through more informal means, similar to the press announcement that was made regarding the Wessex children. But whatever the process Camilla would still legally be Queen Consort.

 

[Osipi]

It may also be as simple as what Queen Elizabeth did. Queen Elizabeth II issued letters patent, dated 22 February 1957, creating Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Charles, as King, could do the same creating Camilla as a Princess of the UK in her own right and therefore she could carry the style of "Princess Consort". It would also, IMO, be more controversial than just going by tradition and having Camilla be Queen Consort.

I sincerely hope and think that, when the time comes, we'll have a Queen Camilla by King Charles III's side. ?

 

[Gawin]

Osipi, I know legally that she would be Queen Consort, what I'm asking is if she were to die before BP had put out a statement regarding her title what would she be called in death, by the Monarchy King Charles, the papers tabloid included and the public?

The tabloids will do what they have always done and call her whatever they want to, with no regard for the facts or even the bounds of human decency.

When Charles becomes King - which as Osipi has said will be the instant the Queen dies - Camilla becomes Queen.

At his accession council, later that day or the next day, he may ask the government of the day to pas the necessary legislation to strip her of that title so he can issue LPs for her to be Princess Consort - or use some other mechanism.

Her only title, as the wife of the King, is Queen.

As the wife of the Prince of Wales she had a choice of may titles but as the wife of the King there is only one title for her.

Mr Blair made it clear, in 2005, that she would be Queen and the only way to deny her that title was by legislation. That means that the first thing that has to happen once Charles is King is for the parliament to pass legislation demoting his wife. It may even need legislation in all the realms that have to pass their own legislation which could be fun.

Clarence House disagreed with Mr. Blair. The issue isn't whether or not she will be Queen (legally she will be just as legally she is Princess of Wales) or if she can be denied the title. It's whether or not she can be forced to use it if she chooses not to. A Queen Consort is not the same as a Queen/King Regnant whose titles are regulated by law. The monarch does in fact have the right to decide the style she is known by.

See the article below which states: "Quite unnoticed in the press (and by me in my research until recently), the legality of the matter was quietly settled in a series of reports and statements from Parliament, as well as by Clarence House in statements that have been lost in the mists of time.

Based on this finding, I’m now able to confirm what I’ve suspected for a long time, that the title of Queen Consort is not actually established by law per se.
Instead, its usage is established through custom and precedent and, according to officials, there will therefore be no need for a change in law or introduction of a new law to give Camilla the status of Princess Consort instead of Queen; rather in the same way as she is currently known as Duchess of Cornwall whilst technically being Princess of Wales, she will be known as Princess Consort instead."

Will Camilla actually be Princess Consort? – Royal Central

 

[MaiaMia_53]

I’m not saying that you’re wrong, but popularity is a fickle thing.
For example we shouldn’t forget how for many years Andrew was the celebrated war hero while Sarah was seen as a breath of fresh air.
The couple was very popular and seen as more easygoing and less stuffy that the Waleses.
Things can change quickly.

The Yorks' popularity changed because of their own behavior and decisions, and character issues.

I guess everyone has seen the leaked news that Harry & Meghan are not interested in their children having any royal titles, and are even considering no titles for them at all. I am not surprised about M&H not giving their children HRH Prince/Princess titles, but I will be surprised if the Sussexes decide to go the route of Princess Anne, with no titles for their children whatsoever.

I understand how Prince Harry feels (especially since he chafed at being called a Prince), but I doubt Meghan necessarily feels it would be a burden for her children to be styled Lord/Lady.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The difference between Anne and Harry is that Harry has a substantive title. He would be the first nobleman in the UK to have his children as plain Mr and Miss if he really does mean 'no titles'. If he has said this I suspect he really means he will follow Edward's lead and they will be styled, for life, as the children of a Duke.

It would be a strange thing for his eldest son, assuming he has a son, to go from Mr Mountbatten-Windsor to His Grace The Duke of Sussex at some point down the track by inheritance from his father.

 

[Pranter]

If Meghan had any issues with the idea of her children having a title she would not of married into a family that does titles.


LaRae

 

[Gawin]

If Meghan had any issues with the idea of her children having a title she would not of married into a family that does titles.


LaRae

Very good point, but if given a choice she may prefer they not have them. I don't have an issue with driving on icy roads which is good considering it snows where I live but if given a choice I prefer my roads ice-free.

 

[jacqui24]

The Yorks' popularity changed because of their own behavior and decisions, and character issues.

I guess everyone has seen the leaked news that Harry & Meghan are not interested in their children having any royal titles, and are even considering no titles for them at all. I am not surprised about M&H not giving their children HRH Prince/Princess titles, but I will be surprised if the Sussexes decide to go the route of Princess Anne, with no titles for their children whatsoever.

I understand how Prince Harry feels (especially since he chafed at being called a Prince), but I doubt Meghan necessarily feels it would be a burden for her children to be styled Lord/Lady.

Let's back up a little bit, who leaked the news about their children not having title at all?