Questions about British Styles and Titles - Page 144

Duc_et_Pair · #**2861** 02-06-2016, 08:34 AM

That decision "with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones" does not take away that formally his son is HRH Prince James of Wessex and his daughter is HRH Princess Louise of Wessex. They are known as Lord James, Viscount Severn and Lady Louise, that does not take away their formal position.

The same with Camilla, who is formally HRH The Princess of Wales, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Rothesay and a whole train of titles, but is known as The Duchess of Cornwall.

Rudolph · #**2862** 02-06-2016, 09:25 AM

Quote:

The Queen has also decided, with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones, that any children they might have should not be given the style His or Her Royal Highness, but would have courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl.

When it comes to the Queen's family, these are the only words that matter. Her Majesty is free to style the members of her family in whatever way she pleases. She can expand or limited the style at her pleasure. It is not done on the advice of Parliament but solely at the Queen's will and pleasure.

How she expresses her will and pleasure is immaterial. There is no ambiguity in the press release from BP. They are not royal highnesses

Duc_et_Pair · #**2863** 02-06-2016, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rudolph

When it comes to the Queen's family, these are the only words that matter. Her Majesty is free to style the members of her family in whatever way she pleases. She can expand or limited the style at her pleasure. It is not done on the advice of Parliament but solely at the Queen's will and pleasure.

How she expresses her will and pleasure is immaterial. There is no ambiguity in the press release from BP. They are not royal highnesses

It needs an Act of Parliament to overturn a Letters Patent. A press release by Buckingham Palace is in no way sufficient to modify the Letters Patent of 1917.

For the title and style of Princess Patricia of Connaught, after her marriage, a Letters Patent was issued.

For the title and style of Ms Wallis Simpson, after her marriage, a Letters Patent was issued.

For the title and style of Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten, after his marriage, a Letters Patent was issued.

For the titles and styles of Lady Diana Spencer and Ms Sarah Ferguson after their divorces, a Letters Patent was issued.

Such a Letters Patent was the establishment of a general rule. It is clear that the Queen uses Letters Patent to make changes to royal titles. The fact that no Letters Patent were issued in the case of James and Louise is significant. The British Monarchy's official website puts it this way: "The couple decided, with The Queen's agreement, that their children would use the courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl rather than the style Prince or Princess."

For me this is convincing: the Letters Patent of 1917 are in full force and the two are only "known as" by choice of their parents. When the parents become HRH The Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh, they are no longer sons or daughters of an Earl. It is possible that the titulature will be re-thought and that the two children maybe will become known as HRH Prince James of Edinburgh and HRH Princess Louise of Edinburgh.

Osipi · #**2864** 02-06-2016, 10:29 AM

As with all things that are done by HM, the statement stating that Edward would, upon his marriage, become the Earl of Wessex and any children would be known as children of an Earl with the intention of Edward being created The Duke of Edinburgh as time passes reflects foresight. This family plans far ahead and the announcement made leaves avenues wide open for things that may happen decades after the issuing date. One would be that James and Louise themselves, upon becoming adults, may wish to serve in a royal capacity and even be sorely needed. Then again they may not.

"Known as" and "styled" is what strikes me most as far as James and Louise goes.

Rudolph · #**2865** 02-06-2016, 12:11 PM

An Act of Parliament is only required to modify Letters Patent regarding peerages. Different things are getting conflated.

Under the umbrella of British styles and titles, is royal styles and titles. That's what is being discussed with Louise and James.

Being a royal highness doesn't mean anything. It carries with it no legal entitlements. For this reason royal prerogative allows the sovereign to change this style as she pleases. I don't know any other way to state it.

To put it bluntly, the only advantage to being a royal highness is that you get to call yourself a royal highness. Its a great pick-up line in a bar but it just denotes a degree of relation to the sovereign. Nothing more.

The general rule of thumb is this, group conferrals of royal titles are usually done by Letters Patent. The 1917 Letters Patent and the 1996 Letters Patent are examples of group conferrals. Both were done without the advice of parliament.

The history of granting of royal titles to individuals is a a little different. In the Queen's reign she has done it with Letters Patent, she has done it via the Court Circular (in the case of The Duchess of Gloucester) and she has done it via press release as in the case of Louise and James.

If the Queen wanted to, she could issue a press release tomorrow stating that Peter Phillips is to be styled as a royal highness and prince of the UK of GB & NI and that would be it. Peter would be a prince. She doesn't have to ask the Prime Minister, she doesn't have to have Letters patent drawn up. She just makes it officially known and that's it.

She can just as easily issue a press release tomorrow stating James, Viscount Severn will be styled as a royal highness and a prince of the UK of GB & NI. Again that's it.

Lets look at the late Duchess of Gloucester. No Letters Patent were ever issued creating her a princess in her own right but the first Court Circular reference to her as Princess Alice Duchess of Gloucester is on the 13 July 1974, when she and her son and daughter-in-law attended a memorial service for her husband at Peterborough Cathedral. She is similarly described in the Court Circular of 23 July, when she attended a memorial service for her husband at Westminster Abbey. So it's clear The Queen made her decision to create her a princess between the death of The Prince Henry on 9 June and this first reference on 13 July.

That's it. The Queen made her will and pleasure known via the Court Circular. No one could say to the Queen, "Ma'am, just so you know, Alice really isn't a princess because you didn't issue Letters Patent"

The Queen is the only person in the realm who decides such matters.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, all I mentioned above applies to royal styles and titles but not to peerages. The constitutional convention is they can only be created by Letters Patent on the advice of the government. Once created, a peerage can then only be modified by an Act of Parliament. Two separate issues.

The Queen can issue a press a release regarding James' style but she needed to use Letters Patent to make Edward an earl. A press release wouldn't have been sufficient.

VictoriaB · #**2866** 02-11-2016, 06:29 PM

Odd that People insist on incorrectly referring to the Duchess of Cambridge as "Princess" Kate but to Camilla as Duchess when they both have the same style.

Countessmeout · #**2867** 02-11-2016, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VictoriaB

Odd that People insist on incorrectly referring to the Duchess of Cambridge as "Princess" Kate but to Camilla as Duchess when they both have the same style.

It seems a common trait among the royal brides. Kate: Princess Kate, Duchess Kate, Kate Middleton. Camilla either gets her correct title or Camilla Parker-Bowles (often when her and Kate are said to be feuding). Diana was Princess Di. Not sure why Camilla is never called Princess Camilla by anyone.

Maybe because of the negative link between her and Diana, and the emphasis on calling her Duchess of Cornwall and not Princess of Wales??? Of course they should be Princess William and Princes Charles if you were to use that title.

Skippyboo · #**2868** 02-11-2016, 09:54 PM

Maybe because when she married Charles she wasn't 20 something. Kate and Diana fit the young woman marrying a Prince to become a Princess fairytale. Camilla marrying Charles after being the mistress in her late 50s isn't really the stereotype.

Plus with Britain not using Princess Women's First Name, it makes it ripe for wrong titles to be used. Mary Donaldson marries Prince Frederick becomes Princess Mary. If she married William it isn't Princess Mary but Hrh Duchess of Cambridge. It's way more simple if you just become Princess Own First Name.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Dman · #**2869** 02-11-2016, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skippyboo

Maybe because when she married Charles she wasn't 20 something. Kate and Diana fit the young woman marrying a Prince to become a Princess fairytale. Camilla marrying Charles after being the mistress in her late 50s isn't really the stereotype.

Plus with Britain not using Princess Women's First Name, it makes it ripe for wrong titles to be used. Mary Donaldson marries Prince Frederick becomes Princess Mary. If she married William it isn't Princess Mary but Hrh Duchess of Cambridge. It's way more simple if you just become Princess Own First Name.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

The Princess title just don't fit Camilla, but it's highly possible that the title HRH The Princess Consort is around the corner.

Sorry, don't have much to do about her patronages. Back to topic.

duchessrachel · #**2870** 05-04-2016, 02:37 PM

I have been a member here for 5 years but only have recently gotten more active. I have searched for an answer to my question on here as I suspect it has already been answered, but I can't find it. I will ask it but if it has already been asked, forgive me. What I want to know is: Did Prince William want Kate to have the title "Princess" when they married? I read that somewhere but it could have been just one of the gossip rags.

Osipi · #**2871** 05-04-2016, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel

I have been a member here for 5 years but only have recently gotten more active. I have searched for an answer to my question on here as I suspect it has already been answered, but I can't find it. I will ask it but if it has already been asked, forgive me. What I want to know is: Did Prince William want Kate to have the title "Princess" when they married? I read that somewhere but it could have been just one of the gossip rags.

She does have the title of Princess. Princess William. As Wills was created a Duke at the time of his marriage, its what they use as their styles. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. If he wasn't given a dukedom, Kate most likely would be referred to as Princess William like Princess Michael of Kent is styled. Females do not gain the use of their first names in their titles and styles other than through divorce. Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York are styles denoting they were at one time married to a peer.

In fact, when registering the birth of Charlotte (I believe), William listed his wife's occupation as Princess of the UK.

Hope this helps.

HRHHermione · #**2872** 05-04-2016, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osipi

She does have the title of Princess. Princess William. As Wills was created a Duke at the time of his marriage, its what they use as their styles. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. If he wasn't given a dukedom, Kate most likely would be referred to as Princess William like Princess Michael of Kent is styled. Females do not gain the use of their first names in their titles and styles other than through divorce. Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York are styles denoting they were at one time married to a peer.

In fact, when registering the birth of Charlotte (I believe), William listed his wife's occupation as Princess of the UK.

Hope this helps.

Yup, for both Charlotte and George, Catherine's occupation was listed as Princess of the UK

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

Dman · #**2873** 05-04-2016, 03:59 PM

I don't know why people find it hard to understand that Catherine is a Princess of the United Kingdom due to her marriage to a Prince of the United Kingdom. It's just that she's referred to by her official title.

The article about her stepping up her work is pretty much about to happen anyway. It's a natural progression of her royal role.

duchessrachel · #**2874** 05-04-2016, 04:11 PM

When I say "title" of Princess, what I mean is "Princess Catherine". I know that it is not correct to refer to her as "Princess Catherine". I was of the understanding that her rank is Princess, but that her title is not "Princess Catherine". I know that it is "Princess William". I thought that William had asked for her to be titled "Princess Catherine". Here is the article I am referring to:
Royal wedding: Prince William asks the Queen not to make him a duke - Telegraph
I don't know if there is any truth to it or not. That is what I am wondering.

Osipi · #**2875** 05-04-2016, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel

When I say "title" of Princess, what I mean is "Princess Catherine". I know that it is not correct to refer to her as "Princess Catherine". I was of the understanding that her rank is Princess, but that her title is not "Princess Catherine". I know that it is "Princess William". I thought that William had asked for her to be titled "Princess Catherine". Here is the article I am referring to:
Royal wedding: Prince William asks the Queen not to make him a duke - Telegraph
I don't know if there is any truth to it or not. That is what I am wondering.

I get where you're coming from now and I seem to recall something along these lines back when the wedding was being planned.

It just doesn't work that way though and its one area where William didn't get what he supposedly wanted (along with wearing his dress RAF uniform for the wedding). Some things you just don't mess with.

Skippyboo · #**2876** 05-04-2016, 04:40 PM

I would take that Telegraph article with a grain of salt. William knew long before he met Kate that he wasn't going to remain as Prince William. He gains titles as he becomes heir to the throne and British Princes have been given dukedoms for several generations now.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Lumutqueen · #**2877** 05-04-2016, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel

When I say "title" of Princess, what I mean is "Princess Catherine". I know that it is not correct to refer to her as "Princess Catherine". I was of the understanding that her rank is Princess, but that her title is not "Princess Catherine". I know that it is "Princess William". I thought that William had asked for her to be titled "Princess Catherine". Here is the article I am referring to:
Royal wedding: Prince William asks the Queen not to make him a duke - Telegraph
I don't know if there is any truth to it or not. That is what I am wondering.

She can only become Princess Catherine if HM grants her a title in her own right. Catherine receives all her titles from William.
It is something rare and I believe only been done twice.

wartenberg7 · #**2878** 05-04-2016, 05:12 PM

She ´s not "Princess Catherine", yet she is a "Princess of the United Kingdom and N Ireland"! It´s confusing but that´s the way it is!
And she´s NOT "Princess William"! That she would have been if William wouldn´t have been made a Duke of Cambridge. But he is, so Catherine is a royal Duchess, Princess of the UK and NI.

Skippyboo · #**2879** 05-04-2016, 06:14 PM

She is still Princess William even with the Duchess of Cambridge title because William is still Prince William at the same time he is Duke of Cambridge. Camilla is Princess Charles, Sophie is Princess Edward etc. It just not their primary title. The Queen is the Duchess of Edinburgh too but she isn't being addressed as that.

Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Mbruno · #**2880** 05-04-2016, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duchessrachel

When I say "title" of Princess, what I mean is "Princess Catherine". I know that it is not correct to refer to her as "Princess Catherine". I was of the understanding that her rank is Princess, but that her title is not "Princess Catherine". I know that it is "Princess William". I thought that William had asked for her to be titled "Princess Catherine". Here is the article I am referring to:
Royal wedding: Prince William asks the Queen not to make him a duke - Telegraph

I don't know if there is any truth to it or not. That is what I am wondering.

If Wiiliam had married a princess in her own right, e.g Madeleine of Sweden, then, after marrying him, she would have been known as HRH Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Cambridge, rather than "Princess William".