Prince William and Catherine Middleton Possible Titles

[LadyCatharine]

Pardon my ignorance, The Prince is higher title then Duke?

 

[texankitcat]

My question, is regarding their eldest son. Would he be Prince X of Wales, exactly the same as William and Henry? It doesn't seem like he should be, since his father would not be the Prince of Wales. But I don't know.

Good question!

 

[Royal_Eagle]

Wasn't it also pretty much a foregone conclusion in 1948, though? George VI and Elizabeth weren't realistically going to have any more children, and Princess Elizabeth was treated as the de facto heiress apparent. I suppose Charles and Anne were the grandchildren of the monarch rather than the great-grandchildren, though.

That was the very exact situation I was thinking of when I suggested that the Queen might issue LPs to make children of PW and Catherine HRHs. But I'd guess it'd be more likely PW and Catherine wouldn't want her to do that and raise them as Lords/Ladies (with the exception of first son)

And the situation isn't exactly the same anyway--great-grandchildren vs grandchildren. So I'm guessing it's more likely the Queen won't do anything, even though I think she should.

We shall see what will happen.

 

[Americanskipper]

Good question!

Thanks. Does anybody know??

 

[Sister Morphine]

No, if William and Kate's first child is a girl, she'd be titled HRH Princess X of Wales, assuming that William doesn't have an earldom or dukedom.

That's incorrect. 1917 Letters Patent from George V state that the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales was to be afforded a princely status, not the eldest daughter or any daughter, for that matter. Whether or not that should be changed is for another thread. If William doesn't have an earldom or dukedom, all children aside from his eldest son (should he have one) will be mere Lord/Lady X Windsor as great-grandchildren of the monarch. Now, during Victoria's reign, great-grandchildren of the monarch in the male line were styled as HH Prince/Princess X of Y, but that obviously changed.

I understand that. My question is, if William and Kate are not make a Duke and Duchess, and so have no territorial designation, then what would their eldest son be named? Would he be HRH Prince X of Wales (just like His father)?

Yes, the eldest son of William would be HRH Prince X of Wales, with the same territorial designation as his father.

Wasn't it also pretty much a foregone conclusion in 1948, though? George VI and Elizabeth weren't realistically going to have any more children, and Princess Elizabeth was treated as the de facto heiress apparent. I suppose Charles and Anne were the grandchildren of the monarch rather than the great-grandchildren, though.

That's why they were afforded a princely status, owing to their status as children of the future Queen. Otherwise, Charles would have merely been Lord Merioneth (one of his father's courtesy titles) and Anne would have been Lady Anne Mountbatten as they were grandchildren in the female line (similar to Peter and Zara).

My question, is regarding their eldest son. Would he be Prince X of Wales, exactly the same as William and Henry? It doesn't seem like he should be, since his father would not be the Prince of Wales. But I don't know.

If William is not bestowed with a dukedom or an earldom on his wedding day, he will continue to be HRH Prince William of Wales. If he and Catherine have a son as their first-born while the Queen is still reigning, that son will be HRH Prince X of Wales. There's a difference between a prince of Wales (which is what William and Harry are) and the Prince of Wales, which is what his father is. The eldest son of William would be a prince of Wales, if his father has no new territorial designation. When Charles is King, if William is created the Prince of Wales, that son will continue to have Wales as his territorial designation. If not, it would change to Wales.

 

[Americanskipper]

If William is not bestowed with a dukedom or an earldom on his wedding day, he will continue to be HRH Prince William of Wales. If he and Catherine have a son as their first-born while the Queen is still reigning, that son will be HRH Prince X of Wales. There's a difference between a prince of Wales (which is what William and Harry are) and the Prince of Wales, which is what his father is. The eldest son of William would be a prince of Wales, if his father has no new territorial designation. When Charles is King, if William is created the Prince of Wales, that son will continue to have Wales as his territorial designation. If not, it would change to Wales.

Are you saying this: Assuming William does not get a territorial designation, his first son would be Prince X of Wales. Then when Prince Charles comes to the throne but before William would be made THE prince of Wales, William's son would be Prince X of Cornwell. Then after William were to be made THE prince of Wales, his son would become Prince X of Wales - AGAIN???

 

[Sunnystar]

Are you saying this: Assuming William does not get a territorial designation, his first son would be Prince X of Wales. Then when Prince Charles comes to the throne but before William would be made THE prince of Wales, William's son would be Prince X of Cornwell. Then after William were to be made THE prince of Wales, his son would become Prince X of Wales - AGAIN???

Yes, you're absolutely correct.

Similar to George V's children being styled Prince X of Cornwall & York after his father's ascent to the throne and prior to the Duke of Cornwall & York being made The Prince of Wales.

 

[Princess Agnes]

That's why they were afforded a princely status, owing to their status as children of the future Queen. Otherwise, Charles would have merely been Lord Merioneth (one of his father's courtesy titles) and Anne would have been Lady Anne Mountbatten as they were grandchildren in the female line (similar to Peter and Zara).

I'd say their princely status was granted them not only because of their condition as children of he future Queen but also because I believe the Mountbatten-Windsor solution for the family name would only be enforced by the Queen later on. I think George VI and Queen Elizabeth wouldn't have been quite pleased with a future Princess of the United Kingdom being names Lady X Mountabatten

 

[Sister Morphine]

Are you saying this: Assuming William does not get a territorial designation, his first son would be Prince X of Wales. Then when Prince Charles comes to the throne but before William would be made THE prince of Wales, William's son would be Prince X of Cornwell. Then after William were to be made THE prince of Wales, his son would become Prince X of Wales - AGAIN???

If William is not given an earldom or a dukedom, he will continue being HRH Prince William of Wales. If he and Catherine have a son while the Queen still reigns, and that son's name is George, he would HRH Prince George of Wales. All other children they have while the Queen still reigns would be Lord/Lady X Windsor.

When Charles becomes King, and William becomes Duke of Cornwall, any children he has will be HRH Prince/Princess X of Cornwall. Just like the children of George V were HRH Prince/Princess X of Cornwall and York when Edward VII became King. If William is then invested as the Prince of Wales, his children will then be HRH Prince/Princess X of Wales, as their father's main title will be The Prince of Wales, rather than The Duke of Cornwall. Children take their titles from their fathers (and in very rare exceptions, their mothers). So whatever territorial designations William has, his children will have.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I'd say their princely status was granted them not only because of their condition as children of he future Queen

No, that's exactly why they were afforded a princely status, because otherwise it would have been denied them as grandchildren of the monarch in the female line. Children take the last name of their fathers, and Philip's last name was Mountbatten. So any children they had past Charles, would have taken his last name, with no princely title or status. Say all of the Queen's children after Charles were born before she became Queen. You'd have the Earl of Merioneth (not Lord Merioneth, as I incorrectly read), Lady Anne Mountbatten, Lord Andrew Mountbatten and Lord Edward Mountbatten. Obviously when Elizabeth became Queen their statuses would change, but when Charles was born in 1948, there was no way of knowing that the King would die in 3 1/2 years.

 

[Mia_mae]

If William is not given an earldom or a dukedom, he will continue being HRH Prince William of Wales. If he and Catherine have a son while the Queen still reigns, and that son's name is George, he would HRH Prince George of Wales. All other children they have while the Queen still reigns would be Lord/Lady X Windsor.

When Charles becomes King, and William becomes Duke of Cornwall, any children he has will be HRH Prince/Princess X of Cornwall. Just like the children of George V were HRH Prince/Princess X of Cornwall and York when Edward VII became King. If William is then invested as the Prince of Wales, his children will then be HRH Prince/Princess X of Wales, as their father's main title will be The Prince of Wales, rather than The Duke of Cornwall. Children take their titles from their fathers (and in very rare exceptions, their mothers). So whatever territorial designations William has, his children will have.

thanks! let's said if the laws for succession were to change, from male primogeniture to just primogeniture, how would things change? If their first-born is a daughter, she would be HRH Princess xx of Wales, and the other ones Lord/Lady?

 

[Susanna Wynne]

Prince William's current and future titles: an explanation.

We do go in circles on this topic...:

It is my understanding that Prince William will always be Prince William of Wales until his father becomes king, because that title denotes that he is the son of The Prince of Wales. If the queen so decides, to the title "Prince William of Wales" will be added " Duke of .......".

It is entirely correct to refer to The Earl of Wessex as "The Prince Edward, The Earl of Wessex", and the Duke of Edinburgh is correctly referred to as "The Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh," -- and yet he is commonly referred to as "The Duke of Edinburgh.

Using that standard, Prince William's full title, if he is granted a dukedom, will be Prince William of Wales, Duke of ......." and Catherine would be styled Princess William of Wales, Duchess of......." However, they will be regularly referred to as the Duke of......... and the Duchess of...., just as Andrew and Sarah were called the Duke and the Duchess of York, yet he was and is still a Royal Prince, son of the monarch, so his full title is "The Prince Andrew, Duke of York."

Explanation: Until his father accedes to the throne, William will continue to be "a" Prince of Wales, not "The" Prince of Wales. And upon Charles's succession, William will immediately be titled "The Prince William, Duke of Cornwall" until such time as Charles creates William " The Prince of Wales," which is a higher title. Then he will be formally "The Prince William, The Prince of Wales, as he will be the son of a king and therefore entitled to "The" before his title of Prince, which now he is not. He will primarily be referred to at that time as The Prince of Wales, but will continue to be The Prince William, just as Charles now is officially "The Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales."

The BIG QUESTION is whether the queen offers and William accepts a dukedom. If no dukedom is offered or accepted, the queen must then decide whether to follow tradition -- or make an exception to the normal rule in Catherine's sake. For under the traditional manner, she would be styled "Princess William of Wales." The queen could make an exception and allow her to be styled "Princess Catherine of Wales." I have no idea how likely that would be, but the queen can do whatever she wishes in such matters.

 

[HRHofNothing]

As an independent female why should she take any title at all from her husband - whatever she uses it will be due to him and not anything she has done. Every name she uses from April 29 will be because of who she married and nothing else so why not be totally honest and use his name - Princess William sounds fine to me - as a feminist - it shows exactly what she has done.

Best post in this thread!

 

[Sister Morphine]

thanks! let's said if the laws for succession were to change, from male primogeniture to just primogeniture, how would things change? If their first-born is a daughter, she would be HRH Princess xx of Wales, and the other ones Lord/Lady?

The sovereign would have to issue new Letters Patent dictating the new styling conventions for the eldest child of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, assuming that the institution of equal primogeniture would not be retroactive, and would continue on with William and Catherine's children.

The institution of equal primogeniture would also bring up the debate about the non-gender neutrality of the heir's titles. For example, Princess of Wales is the wife of The Prince of Wales, not the heiress to the throne (the Queen never held the title). If England adopts equal primogeniture, the title would have to be abolished, as it's not gender-neutral. Same with all the other titles the heir to throne holds.

 

[HRHofNothing]

I think William will be created a Duke-to pave the way for Harry.

Harry is not going to be inheriting any titles upon his father or brother's accession. The best opportunity to grant him a title would be on the morning of his wedding. Since there is a possibility that the Queen would still be reigning when Harry marries, it would be wierd to grant him a dukedom if William does not already have one. So, I believe William will be given one on the 29th..

 

[Mia_mae]

Best post in this thread!

well, if we think about it you can extend this to all royal titles. They are given because of birth. You have the title because you are the "son of your father", not because of a application or because people feel like it. What happens later on it's another matter.

 

[Mia_mae]

The sovereign would have to issue new Letters Patent dictating the new styling conventions for the eldest child of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, assuming that the institution of equal primogeniture would not be retroactive, and would continue on with William and Catherine's children.

The institution of equal primogeniture would also bring up the debate about the non-gender neutrality of the heir's titles. For example, Princess of Wales is the wife of The Prince of Wales, not the heiress to the throne (the Queen never held the title). If England adopts equal primogeniture, the title would have to be abolished, as it's not gender-neutral. Same with all the other titles the heir to throne holds.

uff, I'm tired for you! tnks again

 

[Iluvbertie]

You know if they really don't want a new title they could use a courtesy title of Baron and Baronness Greenwich - as the second in line to the Dukedom of Edinburgh (like the Duke of Gloucester's grandson uses Lord Culloden and the Duke of Kent's grandson uses Lord Downpatrick.

Just a thought!!

 

[CrownPrincess5]

Is the title a "gift" from the queen? Is it a must that she bestow a title on Will?

 

[Sister Morphine]

You know if they really don't want a new title they could use a courtesy title of Baron and Baronness Greenwich - as the second in line to the Dukedom of Edinburgh (like the Duke of Gloucester's grandson uses Lord Culloden and the Duke of Kent's grandson uses Lord Downpatrick.

Just a thought!!

Highly unlikely considering that the Earl of Wessex is expected to receive the dukedom of Edinburgh after Philip dies. To do that would be a slap in the face to Edward, because then the title would belong to William and his descendants.

Is the title a "gift" from the queen? Is it a must that she bestow a title on Will?

It's not a gift per se, nor is she required to do it. It is however, customary for a prince to receive a dukedom (or earldom) on his wedding day. The only one I can think off the top of my head who didn't was Charles, as he already was in possession of several titles when he married Diana in 1981. I mean, even Prince Philip received a dukedom on his wedding day.

 

[MRSJ]

That was the very exact situation I was thinking of when I suggested that the Queen might issue LPs to make children of PW and Catherine HRHs. But I'd guess it'd be more likely PW and Catherine wouldn't want her to do that and raise them as Lords/Ladies (with the exception of first son)

We shall see what will happen.

If she did issue LPs making Williams children all HRH's would that make them all Princes/Princesses? Or can it be HRH Lady x of Cambridge (assuming that's the dukedom granted)?

Or if William is a Duke does that automatically make his children Princess or Prince? I get that if he doesn't get a dukedom only the oldest son is HRH but if he Does get a dukedom are his other children HRH's or not? Or Princess/Princes?

 

[Sister Morphine]

If she did issue LPs making Williams children all HRH's would that make them all Princes/Princesses?

Yes. If the Queen decided that all of William's children should have a royal and princely status, they would be HRH Prince/Princess X of Y. However, it's not likely she'd do that, considering that when Charles takes the throne, William's children will automatically become HRH Prince/Princess X of Y as grandchildren of the monarch in the male line.

 

[MRSJ]

The sovereign would have to issue new Letters Patent dictating the new styling conventions for the eldest child of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, assuming that the institution of equal primogeniture would not be retroactive, and would continue on with William and Catherine's children.

The institution of equal primogeniture would also bring up the debate about the non-gender neutrality of the heir's titles. For example, Princess of Wales is the wife of The Prince of Wales, not the heiress to the throne (the Queen never held the title). If England adopts equal primogeniture, the title would have to be abolished, as it's not gender-neutral. Same with all the other titles the heir to throne holds.

Couldn't they just say the POW is now reissued to eldest child of sovreign as heir and their spouse - thus if it's a girl she can be Princess of Wales and her husband Prince....no need to abolish it, just repackage it.....

 

[Sister Morphine]

Couldn't they just say the POW is now reissued to eldest child of sovreign as heir and their spouse - thus if it's a girl she can be Princess of Wales and her husband Prince....no need to abolish it, just repackage it.....

I'm not sure how it would work. It's not the tradition in the BRF for husbands to take their titles from their wives, assuming you mean that the Princess of Wales as heiress would have a husband titled the Prince of Wales.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Nor is it the tradition in the UK for any couple.

It's not the tradition in the BRF for husbands to take their titles from their wives, assuming you mean that the Princess of Wales as heiress would have a husband titled the Prince of Wales.

 

[MRSJ]

I'm not sure how it would work. It's not the tradition in the BRF for husbands to take their titles from their wives, assuming you mean that the Princess of Wales as heiress would have a husband titled the Prince of Wales.

But if the rules changed and woman can inherit the throne (ie first born) wouldn't men automatically be able to inherit wives titles or is that 2 different issues?

 

[Sister Morphine]

But if the rules changed and woman can inherit the throne (ie first born) wouldn't men automatically be able to inherit wives titles or is that 2 different issues?

That would be two different issues, I think. One issue pertains to inheritance, the other to the styling conventions of spouses. What Sweden is doing, with equal primogeniture and husbands taking their styles from their wives, is very radical for most monarchies.

You could see this becoming more of an issue when Ingrid Alexandra, Elisabeth, Catharina-Amalia, and Leonor are older, because then you'd have a glut of heiresses, rather than heirs. If William and Catherine's first born is a girl, then she would come into play with that as well.

 

[MRSJ]

That would be two different issues, I think. One issue pertains to inheritance, the other to the styling conventions of spouses. What Sweden is doing, with equal primogeniture and husbands taking their styles from their wives, is very radical for most monarchies.

You could see this becoming more of an issue when Ingrid Alexandra, Elisabeth, Catharina-Amalia, and Leonor are older, because then you'd have a glut of heiresses, rather than heirs. If William and Catherine's first born is a girl, then she would come into play with that as well.

Ah! Makes sense now, thank you for clarifying!

 

[Iluvbertie]

Highly unlikely considering that the Earl of Wessex is expected to receive the dukedom of Edinburgh after Philip dies. To do that would be a slap in the face to Edward, because then the title would belong to William and his descendants.

Edward won't receive the Edinburgh Dukedom when Philip dies unless Charles is already King and recreates the title for Edward.


When Charles does inherit Edinburgh and the Crown then it is available for Edward but in the meantime it isn't and William is higher in the order of succession to that title. It might even pass to William's descendents rather than Edward's anyway e.g. William and Kate have a daughter and then a son, with a consequent change in the order of succession to allow the new Diana to inherit that crown ahead of her younger brother then the son would still be in line to the Edinburgh title. Now have Charles and William both predecease Philip and that son becomes Duke of Edinburgh and Edward misses out.

The Edinburgh title has normal remainders so Edward is currently 5th in line to inherit that title compared to William's second.

 

[MRSJ]

Edward won't receive the Edinburgh Dukedom when Philip dies unless Charles is already King and recreates the title for Edward.

When Charles does inherit Edinburgh and the Crown then it is available for Edward but in the meantime it isn't and William is higher in the order of succession to that title. It might even pass to William's descendents rather than Edward's anyway e.g. William and Kate have a daughter and then a son, with a consequent change in the order of succession to allow the new Diana to inherit that crown ahead of her younger brother then the son would still be in line to the Edinburgh title. Now have Charles and William both predecease Philip and that son becomes Duke of Edinburgh and Edward misses out.

The Edinburgh title has normal remainders so Edward is currently 5th in line to inherit that title compared to William's second.

I think her point was publically it's been said Edward will one day be DoE and to 'give' it to William would be distespectful to Edward and probably the Queen's wishes so she probably won't do so....