Questions about British Styles and Titles 1: Ending 2022

[Iluvbertie]

So true. Some time ago a colleague of mine showed me an article done by a researcher at a university in the US for their Ph.D on the reliability and accuracy of various encylopediae such as Britannica and the main US one (can't remember its name) and Wikipedia came out as equally reliable. Its reliability was questioned because anyone could edit it but inaccuracies were usually picked up by other experts pretty quickly. The good point about Wiki is that it usually includes very detailed Bibliographies which show where the information came from.

 

[Osipi]

There is another factor that figures in with Wikipedia. Rather than referring to a set of encyclopedias that are in hard print that people do not tend to update and renew often, Wikipedia, as was pointed out, is ever changing as more and more information becomes available or errors are spotted.

Someone like me could edit a area about titles for a peer in the UK based on what I know and believe to be true but then, like often happens here, along comes Iluvbertie and sets the record straight and the information is more accurate.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I have personally experienced numerous errors and discrepancies in Wikipedia concerning (non-British) noble and royal titles and succession.

The commercial encyclopedias which I have come across simply never detailed subjects such as foreign noble titles and styles.

As far as those subjects are concerned, I encourage being cautious with any statement which is not backed by a trustworthy source, whether it be on Wikipedia, a forum, or in the media.

(I myself commonly write posts without providing sources in the interest of reducing length and sparing time, however, upon request, I would be pleased to offer a link or an explanation of how I learned a certain detail.)

 

[TortillaChips]

Due to the business I used to own I have great experience of using different sources. I must say that Wikipedia is a fantastic resource, it is a very good starting point for finding information but it is so important to check various sources (and also have a bit of common sense when reading anything).

 

[ACO]

So how does this work for Meghan. Sorry if answered already. She won't be a legal citizen for a few years, likely, so in terms of her title can she legally use or am I understanding this wrong? Americans can't hold titles right?

 

[Gaudete]

Possible Dukedom for Harry and Meghan

So how does this work for Meghan. Sorry if answered already. She won't be a legal citizen for a few years, likely, so in terms of her title can she legally use or am I understanding this wrong? Americans can't hold titles right?

This is a tricky one. Based on my understanding, as an American citizen Meghan would not generally have her titles legally recognised by the authorities. But in a social and diplomatic context, she would never be referred to as Mrs Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor. That would cause offence to the British. So even though it might not appear on her American passport, in the USA she’d be called HRH The Duchess of XYZ just as Kate or Camilla are known by their royal titles and styles.

From a UK point of view, as the legal wife of a Prince/Royal Duke, she’s entitled to be known as HRH etc from the moment she’s married. A case in point (though not the best example I grant you) would be the late Duchess of Windsor. As far as I know, she never gave up her American citizenship and didn’t adopt French or British citizenship either before or after her marriage. But in the USA, she was always referred to as Her Grace the Duchess of Windsor in a formal setting. Not having seen any of her legal paperwork from the US after her marriage, I couldn’t say 100% that she was never referred to by the US government as Mrs Wallis Windsor but to the best of my knowledge, I doubt she ever was.

Now I think of it, a far better and less complicated example would be Princess Grace. After her marriage, she was called HSH Princess Grace in a formal setting in the states but I’m not sure if that extend to legal documents too. Having said that, I’m not sure when Princess Grace acquired Monegasque citizenship. Sorry I can’t be more definite!

 

[Ish]

So how does this work for Meghan. Sorry if answered already. She won't be a legal citizen for a few years, likely, so in terms of her title can she legally use or am I understanding this wrong? Americans can't hold titles right?

I believe this is a common misunderstanding of the American constitution.

The US constitution bans the US government from granting titles of nobility to anyone, on the federal and state levels. It also prohibits US citizens from accepting foreign titles while holding office. It does not prohibit all US citizens from accepting foreign titles though, so provided that Meghan isn't holding office in the US (which she isn't), she's fine.

A perfect example is Wallis Simpson - despite being an American, there was no issue with her becoming the Duchess of Windsor (at least not to the Americans). A more recent, but less Royal example is Christopher Guest and Jamie Lee Curtis. Guest was born in New York to a British father and American mother, and so is an American citizenship. This didn't prevent him from inheriting his father's title in 1996, becoming the 5th Baron Haden-Guest. His wife, Jamie Lee Curtis, is also an American born citizen, but is still styled as Lady Haden-Guest because of her husband's titles.

 

[Gaudete]

Ish to the rescue! Would Jamie Lee Curtis be addressed as Lady Haden-Guest on her tax returns? I think that’s where the confusion is here. Will Meghan be entitled to be addressed by her royal title and style in a legal setting in the US?

 

[jacqui24]

Ish to the rescue! Would Jamie Lee Curtis be addressed as Lady Haden-Guest on her tax returns? I think that’s where the confusion is here. Will Meghan be entitled to be addressed by her royal title and style in a legal setting in the US?

No. Same situation was William didn’t use Duke of Cambridge in the French lawsuit. The government doesn’t recognize it as legal name. If in the future, her and Harry comes to US for a visit, she’d still be addressed as Duchess of X as a curtesy, but not as her legal name. It depends on if she legally changes her married name. She could still be Rache Meghan Markle as a married woman. Or she could take the name of Rachel Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor. Although I thought the Queen’s LP only covered those that weren’t holders of the Prince title, but I think William used Mountbatten-Windsor rather than just Windsor in the France case? But either way, it’s trhe same point that she’d have to use her legal name instead.

 

[Gaudete]

I imagine Meghan’s legal affairs in the US would only be restricted to private IRS correspondence anyway after her marriage and permanent relocation. In public she’ll always be called by her proper title so I wouldn’t have thought it’ll ever be an issue but thanks for the clarification on this one. It had been at the back of my mind too!

 

[ACO]

No. Same situation was William didn’t use Duke of Cambridge in the French case. The government doesn’t recognize it as legal name.

Yet they will recognized Meghan's title? They already calling her a princess

Thank you for the answers. This is a lot clearer now.

 

[Curbside]

The IRS doesn't care about titles, just names and social security numbers.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Ish to the rescue! Would Jamie Lee Curtis be addressed as Lady Haden-Guest on her tax returns? I think that’s where the confusion is here. Will Meghan be entitled to be addressed by her royal title and style in a legal setting in the US?

I believe that on legal documents in the US, Ms Curtis would still be Ms Jamie Lee Curtis or Mrs. Jamie Lee Guest, whichever she uses as her legal name. But certainly in the UK or certain other occasions there is no issue with her being Lady Haden-Guest. So Meghan's US passport might say her name is Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor, but people would still call her HRH Duchess of whatever.

In France there is no legal recognition of titles or married names. When the Cambridges filed their lawsuit in France they were listed as Catherine Middleton and William Mountbatten-Windsor.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I imagine Meghan’s legal affairs in the US would only be restricted to private IRS correspondence anyway after her marriage and permanent relocation. In public she’ll always be called by her proper title so I wouldn’t have thought it’ll ever be an issue but thanks for the clarification on this one. It had been at the back of my mind too!

She'll still have a US passport as well.

 

[Ish]

Yet they will recognized Meghan's title? They already calling her a princess

Thank you for the answers. This is a lot clearer now.

Technically she is going to be a Princess - she just won't be styled as Princess if Harry gets a Dukedom and she'll never be Princess Meghan. Not that that'll stop the US media...

I would expect her titles to be recognized in most official purposes; if she and Harry go on a visit to Washington, they'll be received as HRH The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (or wherever). She might legally be in the US Rachel Meghan Markle, but if she attends an official dinner at the White House her place name is going to say HRH The Duchess of Sussex (or wherever).

If I was in Meghan's shoes, I don't know that I'd necessarily change my legal name in the US after marriage. It would be paperwork, hassle, and expense that isn't necessary - it really would only change the name she uses on her taxes and driver's license.

 

[jacqui24]

If I was in Meghan's shoes, I don't know that I'd necessarily change my legal name in the US after marriage. It would be paperwork, hassle, and expense that isn't necessary - it really would only change the name she uses on her taxes and driver's license.

That’s what I was thinking too. She can changed passports with name change by mail, but she’d have to change her name on her social security card in person. However, what’d her legal name in U.K. be? It might create some additional drama in the press. I can’t remember how Kate’s name was filled out on the children’s birth certificates?

 

[Curbside]

She doesn't have to change her social security card in person--I've done it myself. All you have to do is mail in a copy of your marriage certificate.

 

[jacqui24]

She doesn't have to change her social security card in person--I've done it myself. All you have to do is mail in a copy of your marriage certificate.

Hmm, didn’t know that. I ended up going to the place to change my name. Poop, could’ve saved myself a trip. But regardless, can all other legal docs be done this way?

 

[ACO]

Technically she is going to be a Princess - she just won't be styled as Princess if Harry gets a Dukedom and she'll never be Princess Meghan. Not that that'll stop the US media...

I would expect her titles to be recognized in most official purposes; if she and Harry go on a visit to Washington, they'll be received as HRH The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (or wherever). She might legally be in the US Rachel Meghan Markle, but if she attends an official dinner at the White House her place name is going to say HRH The Duchess of Sussex (or wherever).

If I was in Meghan's shoes, I don't know that I'd necessarily change my legal name in the US after marriage. It would be paperwork, hassle, and expense that isn't necessary - it really would only change the name she uses on her taxes and driver's license.

Haha, yes I know. They will call her Princess Meghan until their hearts content. They call Catherine "Princess Kate" all the time here as well. So I expect nothing less. It is no biggie. Good point about the bolded. I would imagine it is quite the hassle besides it will also be temporary. Not worth it.

 

[Rudolph]

Meghan will be Duchess of xxxx by courtesy. It’s not substantive. It’s Harry who will be granted the peerage

 

[Ish]

That’s what I was thinking too. She can changed passports with name change by mail, but she’d have to change her name on her social security card in person. However, what’d her legal name in U.K. be? It might create some additional drama in the press. I can’t remember how Kate’s name was filled out on the children’s birth certificates?

Kate's name was filled out on George's birth certificate as Catherine Elizabeth Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Cambridge". William was "His Royal Highness Prince William Arthur Philip Louis Duke of Cambridge".

For the legal name change... according to gov.uk, "You don’t need a deed poll to take your spouse’s or civil partner’s surname. Send a copy of your marriage or civil partnership certificate to record-holders, such as benefits offices. Your documents will be updated for free." I'm not sure, though, how that works when you're a foreigner marrying a royal.

 

[Curbside]

I did my driver's license in person, but I needed to renew it anyway (I'm in Texas). My employer just needed my marriage certificate. For credit reporting purposes, I just started using my new name and had no issues. Oddly enough, getting PayPal to change my name was a huge hassle and I wound up not doing it. Too much trouble.

My mother never changed her legal name, but she does use my father's surname socially.

 

[jacqui24]

I’m assuming if she changes her name in any form in U.K., she’d have to change it in US. Does anyone know differently?

 

[O-H Anglophile]

However, what’d her legal name in U.K. be? It might create some additional drama in the press. I can’t remember how Kate’s name was filled out on the children’s birth certificates?

In the Name and surname block of George's birth certificate--
Catherine Elizabeth Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge

So I imagine Meghan's legal name in the UK will be
Rachel Meghan Her Royal Highness The Duchess of whatever.

 

[ACO]

In the Name and surname block of George's birth certificate--
Catherine Elizabeth Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge

So I imagine Meghan's legal name in the UK will be
Rachel Meghan Her Royal Highness The Duchess of whatever.

So fascinating. Also why do the guys informally have Wales as their last name and not Mountbatten-Windsor because that is technically their last name, right?

This stuff so confusing. No wonder people just be like "Prince and Princess" and keep it moving.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

So fascinating. Also why do the guys informally have Wales as their last name and not Mountbatten-Windsor because that is technically their last name, right?

This stuff so confusing. No wonder people just be like "Prince and Princess" and keep it moving.

Because folks with royal titles often use the title name as their last name when they need one. Technically they don't have a last name since they are royal princes and princesses. Occasionally, they need to legally use Mountbatten-Windsor like William did in William & Kate's French lawsuit.

So the Prince of Wales's sons were known as
William Wales and Harry Wales

The Duke of York's daughters usually use
Beatrice York and Eugenie York

I remember there being a report of Kate giving the name Mrs Cambridge at a store when she and William still lived in Wales.

 

[Iluvbertie]

So fascinating. Also why do the guys informally have Wales as their last name and not Mountbatten-Windsor because that is technically their last name, right?

This stuff so confusing. No wonder people just be like "Prince and Princess" and keep it moving.

Wales, York etc are used to really distinguish the line e.g. Queen Victoria had four sons and a number of grandchildren named Albert or Victoria so it was helpful to use 'of Wales' or 'of Cambridge' to identify which child was actually being referenced.

Today we have two Prince Edwards. One of the reasons why we know which one is the focus of the discussion is that one is 'of Wessex' while the other is 'of Kent' so imagine what it was like with four or five with the same name.

The beauty of the UK system is that only those born as a Prince or Princess are able to use their birth name. Any wife is Princess husband's name - again to show that she is the wife of which prince so everyone knows that the Duchess of Cambridge is the wife of the Duke just as they know that Princess Michael is the wife of Prince Michael. If they all because Princess with their own names again there could be confusion about what the relationship is. The British even referred to Prince Philip's mother as Princess Andrew of Greece after her marriage even though she was born Princess Alice of Hesse.

Some people find it confusing but it does make sense if you think of it like any family where the wife takes the husband's name as do the children but use the title rather than the actual surname if there is one.

In time, if William's third child is a boy and Harry has son/s their descendants will be 'Mountbatten-Windsor's' as Lady Louise is today but while they are HRHs they use their father's titles.

The Dukes of Gloucester and Kent (and siblings) when children' were 'of Kent' but their children are now 'Windsor' (except Alexandra's of course who took their father's name).

 

[wbenson]

In the Name and surname block of George's birth certificate--
Catherine Elizabeth Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge

So I imagine Meghan's legal name in the UK will be
Rachel Meghan Her Royal Highness The Duchess of whatever.

Those aren't necessarily consistent, though. In 1988, Sarah was just "Her Royal Highness the Duchess of York."

 

[ACO]

Thanks for the explanation. I think I understand now.

 

[Countessmeout]

Those aren't necessarily consistent, though. In 1988, Sarah was just "Her Royal Highness the Duchess of York."

No, Sarah on legal paper work would have been similar. They are all the same.

HRH Princess William, Duchess of Cambridge

HRH Princess Harry, Duchess of X

HRH Princess Andrew, Duchess of York.

But when they require a last name, their title will not work. The children of a duke use the designation. Harry Wales, George Cambridge, Beatrice York. The wives seem to use the form that divorcees use ie Catherine Elizabeth, Duchess of Cambridge. Where the title stands as the surname.