Questions about British Styles and Titles 1: Ending 2022

[EllieCat]

Apart from Maxima, Stephanie of Luxembourg and Mathilde of Belgium were also created Princesses in their own right of their respective countries. Thus, Stephanie is Princess Stephanie, Hereditary Grand Duchess of Luxembourg and Mathilde is Princess Mathilde, Duchess of Brabant.

Personally, totally my own opinion, i feel if they do the job, they deserve being called Princess Sophie (or whomever).

Just as i feel if someone is made a knight, such as Sir Paul Holmes (in my own country), then his wife should be just Mrs, as she did not do anything to deserve it.

(This would solve that really annoying - to me - habit of the NZ press to call anyone who's the wife of a knight, Lady Firstname Surname. E.g. Lady Deborah Holmes, when it should be just Lady Holmes.) Just a personal bugbear of mine; it's so easy to get it right.

 

[EllieCat]

Edward and Sophie wanted their children styled as the children of an earl, so they are. They are legally Princess Louise and Prince James of Wessex, which when they're 18, they can assume as their rightful titles if they so choose.

I expect that when their parents become DUke and DUchess of Edinburgh, then Lady Louise will retain that style, and Viscount Severn will become Earl of Wessex. I think that would be correct.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I expect that when their parents become DUke and DUchess of Edinburgh, then Lady Louise will retain that style, and Viscount Severn will become Earl of Wessex. I think that would be correct.

If they wanted to, they could assume their princely titles and become Princess Louise of Edinburgh and Prince James of Edinburgh. Though it's unlikely that they would, as they've lived their entire lives without them, but it would be within their rights. Once Edward assumes his father's dukedom, James would become Lord Merioneth, as the heir to that ducal title.

 

[NGalitzine]

If they wanted to, they could assume their princely titles and become Princess Louise of Edinburgh and Prince James of Edinburgh. Though it's unlikely that they would, as they've lived their entire lives without them, but it would be within their rights. Once Edward assumes his father's dukedom, James would become Lord Merioneth, as the heir to that ducal title.

Edward will not succeed to the Edinburgh dukedom. On the passing of the duke Charles succeeds. On His accession to the throne the Edinburgh title merges with the Crown. It is up to Charles to then create his brother Duke of Edinburgh. Viscount Severn will then start to use his fathers secondary title, Earl of Wessex/

 

[Iluvbertie]

Edward will not succeed to the Edinburgh dukedom. On the passing of the duke Charles succeeds. On His accession to the throne the Edinburgh title merges with the Crown. It is up to Charles to then create his brother Duke of Edinburgh. Viscount Severn will then start to use his fathers secondary title, Earl of Wessex/

You are correct in the normal course of events but...there are scenarios where the title doesn't merge with the Crown e.g. William's child is a girl and both Charles and William predecease Philip (unlikely but...) then the girl becomes Queen and Harry Duke of Edinburgh.

There are many scenarios still in play for the Edinburgh title - the most likely is that it will merge with the Crown at some time through Charles but that isn't a given.

We are also assuming that Charles will honour the announcement made in 1999 (and I have no doubt that he will) but what about William - will he honour that announcement??? - I am no so sure about him.

 

[HRHThePrince]

A few months ago I was somewhat confused on the official title & style of a wife of a British prince. I referenced The Queen's late aunt, Prince Alice, Duchess of Gloucester, who requested permission from the Queen to style herself as Princess Alice. As before, I read that Queen Victoria's granddaughter, Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone hated the fact of two Princess Alice's in the Royal Family. She felt that the Dowager Duchess of Gloucester should have been styled HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester. Plenty on this forum said that wasn't the correct style for a widow who was the wife of a peer-- and that it was incorrect for her to be styled as The Princess Henry.


I was scanning the British Monarchy website & came across something very odd concerning The Countess of Wessex. In the Styles & Titles section of her page, it says

The Countess of Wessex can also be known as Her Royal Highness The Princess Edward, Countess of Wessex.

Here's the link Styles and titles

 

[Lumutqueen]

I was scanning the British Monarchy website & came across something very odd concerning The Countess of Wessex. In the Styles & Titles section of her page, it says

The Countess of Wessex can also be known as Her Royal Highness The Princess Edward, Countess of Wessex.

Here's the link Styles and titles

Why is that odd? That's her title.
Her Royal Highness The Princess Edward Antony Richard Louis, Countess of Wessex, Viscountess Severn, Dame Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order, Dame of Justice of the Most Venerable Order of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem

 

[Artemisia]

A few months ago I was somewhat confused on the official title & style of a wife of a British prince. I referenced The Queen's late aunt, Prince Alice, Duchess of Gloucester, who requested permission from the Queen to style herself as Princess Alice. As before, I read that Queen Victoria's granddaughter, Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone hated the fact of two Princess Alice's in the Royal Family. She felt that the Dowager Duchess of Gloucester should have been styled HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester. Plenty on this forum said that wasn't the correct style for a widow who was the wife of a peer-- and that it was incorrect for her to be styled as The Princess Henry.


I was scanning the British Monarchy website & came across something very odd concerning The Countess of Wessex. In the Styles & Titles section of her page, it says

The Countess of Wessex can also be known as Her Royal Highness The Princess Edward, Countess of Wessex.

Here's the link Styles and titles

In regards to Princess Alice's title, she was The Duchess of Gloucester until her husband was alive. Once he died, she should have become The Dowager Duchess of Gloucester, while her son's wife was The Duchess of Gloucester. However, Alice reportedly hated being called Dowager Duchess so she requested the Queen to be known as Princess Alice although usually only Princesses by birth can prefix the title to their names. The request was granted and from 1974 until her death in 2004, her title was Her Royal Highness Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester.


The Countess of Wessex is indeed a Princess of the United Kingdom - Princess by marriage. Because she isn't a Princess in her own right, Sophie can't prefix the title to her name (Princess Sophie) so is instead known under her husband's styles and titles - The Princess Edward, Countess of Wessex. In the same way, Camilla is The Princess Charles, Kate is Princess William, Birgitte is Princess Richard, Katharine is Princess Edward, Marie Christine is Princess Michael.

All of these ladies are known under their husband's peerage titles (Countess of Wessex, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Cambridge, Duchess of Gloucester, etcetera) because a person usually uses his/her highest available title - and peerage titles take precedence over those of "mere" Princes and Princesses of the United King. Thus, the Earl of Wessex is actually higher than just Prince Edward and consequently, the Countess of Wessex is higher than Princess Edward. If Prince William hadn't been created the Duke of Cambridge before his marriage, his wife would have been known as Princess William.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Artemsia, Catherine isn't "The Princess William." The definite article "the" is reserved for children of the monarch (and Prince Philip). She won't be "The Princess William" until Charles is King. For now, she's HRH Princess William, Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn, Baroness Carrickfergus.

 

[Artemisia]

You are perfectly right; I have removed "The" from Kate's title, as well as those of Birgitte, Marie Christine and Katharine.
Only Camilla and Sophie as The Princess Charles and The Princess Edward respectively.

 

[Molly2101]

Camilla and Sophie can be styled HRH The Princess Charles and HRH The Prince Edward, but I have never seen it used in the United Kingdom. In the other commonwealth countries, and other visits the aforementioned women have been on, often use The Princess Charles/Edward, followed by their other styles (Cornwall and Wessex.)

Is James THE Viscount Severn or is he James, Viscount Severn? I know that Louise is THE Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, but we only ever seen it Lady Louise unless it is in the Court Circular. It was THE in William and Catherine's Order of Service, which is where I noticed it first.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Is James THE Viscount Severn or is he James, Viscount Severn? I know that Louise is THE Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, but we only ever seen it Lady Louise unless it is in the Court Circular. It was THE in William and Catherine's Order of Service, which is where I noticed it first.

James, Viscount Severn and Lady Louise Windsor seems the most accurate. The THE seems to be for The Queens children.

Something I find odd, is that in Sophie's title she is still Viscountess Severn, yet her son is Viscount Severn.

 

[Artemisia]

Camilla and Sophie can be styled HRH The Princess Charles and HRH The Prince Edward, but I have never seen it used in the United Kingdom. In the other commonwealth countries, and other visits the aforementioned women have been on, often use The Princess Charles/Edward, followed by their other styles (Cornwall and Wessex.)

Is James THE Viscount Severn or is he James, Viscount Severn? I know that Louise is THE Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, but we only ever seen it Lady Louise unless it is in the Court Circular. It was THE in William and Catherine's Order of Service, which is where I noticed it first.

As mentioned earlier, a person uses his/her highest available title, which is why you'll never see Camilla, Sophie or Kate being addressed as The Princess Charles, The Princess Edward or Princess William. If, however, one of their husbands had no peerage title, they would have been very much known under that style. Look at Princess Michael of Kent. As for The in William and Kate's title, was it The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge? In that case, The simply signifies the peer and his current wife.

James is not The Viscount Severn, he is James, Viscount Severn. Right now, he uses the title Viscount Severn as his style by courtesy, as the eldest son of the Earl of Wessex. However, the title Viscount Severn still belongs to his father, Prince Edward (whose full titles are His Royal Highness The Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, Viscount Severn). When Prince Edward passes away and James inherits his father's peerage titles (assuming they are the same as now), he will be The Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn; since Earl of Wessex is the more senior title, that's the one James will be known under.

 

[Molly2101]

James, Viscount Severn and Lady Louise Windsor seems the most accurate. The THE seems to be for The Queens children.

Something I find odd, is that in Sophie's title she is still Viscountess Severn, yet her son is Viscount Severn.

THE is for the Monarch's children who are Princes and a Princess, but in the CC Lady Louise was styled as The Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, and it was the same for her in the Royal wedding Order of Service. I believe Lady Sarah is The Lady Sarah as well, but we only ever seen her styled as Lady Sarah.

Thanks for clearing up James' title Artemisia.

 

[Artemisia]

THE is for the Monarch's children who are Princes and a Princess, but in the CC Lady Louise was styled as The Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, and it was the same for her in the Royal wedding Order of Service. I believe Lady Sarah is The Lady Sarah as well, but we only ever seen her styled as Lady Sarah.

Louise is indeed The Lady Louise Windsor (or Mountbatten-Windsor) because she is a daughter of a Peer. In the same way, Diana was The Lady Diana, Sarah Chatto is The Lady Sarah Chatto, the Duke of Gloucester's daughters are The Lady Davina and The Lady Rose, etcetera.

To explain better, "The" is used:
- Before the title of a Prince/Princess to signify their positions as children of the Sovereign (The Princess Anne, The Prince Edward...)
- Before the title of a Peer, whether royal or not (The Earl of Wessex, The Duke of Wellington...)
- Before the title of a Peeress in her own right (The Baroness Thatcher...)
- Before the title of the current wife of a Peer (The Duchess of Westminster, The Countess of Mar...) *
- Before the title of the Peer's widow (The Dowager Duchess of Devonshire...)
- Before the style of non-royal sons of a British Prince (The Lord Frederick Windsor, the Lord Nicholas Windsor...) **

* Former wives of peers are styles as Name + Peerage title without "The". For instance, the current wife of the Earl Spencer is known as The Countess Spencer while his former wife is Caroline, Countess Spencer. Similarly, Sarah Ferguson is styled as Sarah, Duchess of York.
** Royal sons of British Princes (male-line grandchildren of the Monarch) don't appear to share this privilege. For instance, Harry is simply Prince Henry of Wales (and not The Prince Henry), Prince Richard (before he became The Duke of Gloucester) was Prince Richard of Gloucester, etcetera.

 

[branchg]

Being a Peer of the Realm is superior to being just a Prince/Princess. In the UK, having royal rank signifies place and precedence to the throne by right of birth or marriage.

A prince or princess holds superior rank as HRH, but is still a commoner. Once created a Peer, they have a title, rather than just a style.

 

[Meraude]

- Before the title of a Peeress in her own right (The Baroness Thatcher...)
- Before the title of the current wife of a Peer (The Duchess of Westminster, The Countess of Mar...)

The Countess of Mar is perhaps not the best example to choose, as there are two ladies with the title the Countess of Mar, one being the wife of the 14th Earl of Mar and the 16th Earl of Kellie, and the second is the 31st Countess of Mar and 24 Lady Garioch suo jure, even if both have the right to the title the Countess of Mar.

 

[HRHThePrince]

Did you read anything that i wrote?

 

[cepe]

Did you read anything that i wrote?

I thought that Artemesia answered your question in post#1764.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Did you read anything that i wrote?

Quite a number of people did read what you wrote, Artemisia replied directly to your post, and other discussed issues raised from that leading to a number of later posts to yours.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Did you read anything that i wrote?

Yes, and several people explained it to you. Not only why Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester was styled the way she was, but why it wasn't odd that The Countess of Wessex is also HRH The Princess Edward. Read the replies to your questions before accusing people of not reading them at all.

 

[HRHThePrince]

Listen closely, I said in an earlier post sometime ago Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone felt that if the Dowager Duchess of Gloucester didn't want to be known as a Dowager, instead of asking permission to be called Princess Alice, out of respect for her, a granddaughter of Queen Victoria, she should have been known as HRH The Prince Henry, Duchess of Gloucester as a princess-by-marriage. From the beginning I always said she could have been known by that title—others argued against it saying she COULD NEVER BE KNOWN AS THAT!

Again, after I posted it many members of this website told me it was WRONG & incorrect for Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone to suggest that the Dowager Duchess of Gloucester use such a title. And one of the members who said it was incorrect is I1uvbertie. This is what he wrote me:


“To a certain extent because she was born a Princess and The Duchess of Gloucester wasn't.

It is never done to refer to a wife as HRH The Princess male name, The Duchess of xxxx e.g. HRH The Princess Richard, The Duchess of Gloucester isn't the correct form and HRH The Princess Henry, The Duchess of Gloucester was never the late Princess Alice's style - when she married she lost any name officially at all but simply became HRH The Duchess of Gloucester. To revert to HRH The Princess Henry would be to deny the fact that she had married a peer of the realm and indicate that she had married an untitled son. On her becoming a widow the options were to insist on HRH The Dowager Duchess of Gloucester or allow her the special style of HRH Princess Alice.”


So YES, it was odd to me that many members on this forum said it was incorrect for Princess Alice to be styled HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester, but then flip the script & now say (since its officially on the Royal Family’s website) its correct & okay for Sophie to be styled HRH The Princess Edward, Countess of Wessex. The Queen has the right to make any decision she wants regarding titles, and she decided to grant Alice this request.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Sophie is NOT styled as HRH The Princess Edward, Countess of Wessex. She's styled as HRH The Countess of Wessex. You're confusing titles with styles. Titles are what you hold, styles are what people refer to you as. For example, Camilla holds the title The Princess of Wales. She is styled as The Duchess of Cornwall. Catherine holds the title HRH Princess William, but she's styled as The Duchess of Cambridge. Sophie is legally, by virtue of marring Edward, HRH The Princess Edward, yada yada yada.....but that's not her style.

In regards to Princess Alice, she held the title HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester, but her style was HRH The Duchess of Gloucester. When she was widowed and her son became HRH The Duke of Gloucester, what was de rigeur for the widowed wife of a peer was to be known as The Dowager Duchess/Countess of ________. She didn't like the word "dowager", and she couldn't be simply HRH The Duchess of Gloucester, because that was her daughter-in-law. So she asked if she could be styled as HRH Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester, and the Queen consented. It's not the correct form in the BRF for the widowed wife of a peer to be known as HRH The Princess ________, Duchess/Countess of _________. It wasn't an option for her to take. That's why people were telling you it was incorrect for her to be styled that way after her husband died. It was also why people were telling you there was nothing odd with Sophie being HRH The Princess Edward so forth and so on, because legally that's what she is......but again, that's not how she's styled.

 

[HRHThePrince]

Well I took the liberty to contact both Debrett's Peerage & Burke's Peerage, the latter being less helpful, but they did give a formal response. I used the same email with both of them. Here is what I wrote & how they responded regarding the legal style and title of Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester.

To Debrett's Peerage

From: D Johnson [mailto:XXXXXX@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 February 2013 05:30
To: Peerage
Subject:



Hello,



My name is Dameon. I have been in a debate with someone regarding the legal title of the late Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester. I read in a biography of The Queen that Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone, a granddaughter of Queen Victoria objected to the Dowager Duchess of Gloucester being styled as "Princess Alice", and felt that if she didn't want to be known as a Dowager, she should have been styled HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester instead as a princess by marriage.



Many have argued that styling her The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester after her hsband's death was incorrect. However, after scanning the British Monarchy website, I noticed that in the Titles & Honours section for the Countess of Wessex, it explicitly states that she can be known as HRH The Princess Edward, Countess of Wessex, even though she is officially styled HRH The Countess of Wessex.



All I would like to know is could the late Princess Alice have been known as HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester, as pointed out by Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone?


Debrett's Peerage Response


Dear Dameon

Thank you for your interesting e-mail.

I took the liberty of sending it to a friend, Robert Horley, who has contributed much valuable work to the Debrett on all matters royal and titled, and he has sent me a considered reply (below), which he is happy for me to pass on to you. Also below is my rather less considered reply.

Best wishes
Charles Kidd

(Charles Kidd) Hello Robert, I seem to remember being told that HM waived this slightly irregular style (Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester) out of deference to her aunt wishing to enjoy a similar style as Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent - although of course I realise that the latter was already a princess in her own right. I am sure she should really have been either the Dowager or Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester, as this chap suggests - or am I wrong? C



(From Robert Horley) I've often pondered this and frequently searched for an 'official' notification for the change in Alice's style after she became a widow and I've concluded there is no such official notification in the public domain.
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 between the death of The Prince Henry on 9 June and this first reference on 13 July.
I believe the strict legal status of the wife or widow of Prince Henry is that she is the Duchess of Gloucester. Any other style given to her (Dowager, Princess Henry or Princess Alice) is in the gift of The Queen.
How The Queen chooses to style her relatives is up to her and not subject to the laws of the land and, as such, cannot successfully be challenged in a court of law. It was clearly a departure from what had happened in the past, but is no less valid for that. My understanding is The Queen wanted to honour her aunt in this way: for the long service she had given (and, as it turned out, the decades of service she was to give) - although your explanation makes equal sense!
Nor does she have to publish her decision anywhere. Not issuing Letters Patent or a Warrant, does not make the decision any less valid. The Queen does of course sometimes allow an explanation to be published, as in the case of the Earl of Wessex and his children.
I hope this helps but do come back to me if you want to discuss further.


Burke's Peerage Response




Dear Mr Johnson,

HRH The Princess Henry, Duchess of Gloucester – yes.

Kind regards,

Burke’s Peerage Editorial Team

78 Pall Mall, London, SW1Y 5ES, United Kingdom

 

[Sister Morphine]

That's all well and good, but people still answered your question on several fronts. If you're not satisfied with the quality of the responses you received, that's not our problem.

 

[HRHThePrince]

You have a very bad attitude I've noticed... and it is sad. You come off as if your answer & those of others are law & shouldn't be questioned. By the way you responded, I can tell that it bothered you that I reached out to historical & genealogical societies that are considered experts in the topic at hand. And according to them, what I said for sometime is actually correct, when others like you said it wasn't.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Why would it bother me? I don't actually care. I just found it incredibly snotty of you to say "did you read anything that I wrote" after several people took the time to answer your question. Whether they were right or wrong isn't the point. It was the tone of your response to those people that hocked me off. If you felt that those people didn't answer your question to your satisfaction, there were better, less obnoxious ways for you say it, rather then coming off like they wasted your precious time.

So it's not me who has the bad attitude. Myself and the others in this thread answered you to the best of our knowledge. If that knowledge wasn't enough, what exactly should we do? Apologize?

 

[PrincePatrick]

Hey everyone! I'm not sure if this has been brought up in the Cambridge baby threads (I'm a little behind in reading those) but I'm watching the documentary about Edward and Mary: The Forgotten Tudors, and the host (I think it's David... something or other) is talking about how Mary and then Elizabeth were proclaimed Princesses of Wales. Last I checked folks on here were saying that granting the title of Princess of Wales to a female heir had never been done before. Is the host just dramatizing, or were these princesses actually given those titles?

 

[Tiggersk8]

You have a very bad attitude I've noticed... and it is sad. You come off as if your answer & those of others are law & shouldn't be questioned. By the way you responded, I can tell that it bothered you that I reached out to historical & genealogical societies that are considered experts in the topic at hand. And according to them, what I said for sometime is actually correct, when others like you said it wasn't.

You asked a question, it was answered and in great detail by one member here Which had to have taken up quite a bit of her time to do so considering how indepth she answered your question. You then proceed to treat us in a very arrogant manner, act like you had been ignored completely and/or you got the wrong answer, which you were not treated as nor received the wrong answer to your question.

You then proceed to tell us you've contacted "the experts" w/your question and look at that!!! You pretty much got the same answer as was given you here by at least four different people. Since it's "Debrett's" and therefore the experts, I guess that trumps whatever you were told here. I honestly can't believe you went to all of that trouble and for what? The only reason I can think is to rub our faces in "just how wrong we were", only those who answered your question didn't tell you anything different from what you were told by Debrett's, so...

Why didn't you do that in the first place?

BTW...I've checked the thread for Iluvbertie's posts and from the one I did see going back through the last three pages, there was nothing in it that matches up w/what you say you were told by him/her. That means she/he sent you a Private Message. Posting what another member has told you in the form of a PM out in the open on the board for all to see, unless she/he gave you permission to do so and I doubt it, is not cool and quite rude to boot.

Which leads me to this...

You come on here, basically treat us as an arrogant rude clique who need educating from "the experts" on the subject at hand since you felt you didn't get what you wanted and then have the outright nerve to start calling others on the thread calling you out for your behaviour as rude, arrogant and in need of an attitude adjustment?

Pot calling kettle black much?

 

[Osipi]

Hey everyone! I'm not sure if this has been brought up in the Cambridge baby threads (I'm a little behind in reading those) but I'm watching the documentary about Edward and Mary: The Forgotten Tudors, and the host (I think it's David... something or other) is talking about how Mary and then Elizabeth were proclaimed Princesses of Wales. Last I checked folks on here were saying that granting the title of Princess of Wales to a female heir had never been done before. Is the host just dramatizing, or were these princesses actually given those titles?

To my knowledge, there has never been a Princess of Wales in her own right. Several previous Princesses of Wales did go on to become Queen Consorts and some of them that didn't, retained the title of Dowager Princess of Wales after their husband's death. A good example of this would be Catherine of Aragon, Henry VIII's first wife. On divorce, she was then known as the Dowager Princess of Wales until her death. This is unique to her because she had been previously married to Henry's older brother who was a Prince of Wales.

To date there have been 10 Princesses of Wales. The list and dates can be found here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_of_Wales