Prince William and Catherine Middleton Possible Titles


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

What Title will the Queen bestow on William and Catherine?

  • Duke of Clarence

    Votes: 25 16.3%
  • Duke of Cambridge

    Votes: 68 44.4%
  • Duke of Sussex

    Votes: 5 3.3%
  • Duke of Windsor

    Votes: 8 5.2%
  • Duke of Kendall

    Votes: 2 1.3%
  • Earl of Something

    Votes: 8 5.2%
  • Hey! My choice isn't listed. I think it will be something else.

    Votes: 11 7.2%
  • Nothing. I think they will remain Prince and Princess William of Wales

    Votes: 26 17.0%

  • Total voters
    153
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Diarist:

As someone who is relatively new who has been chastened for an opinion by other posters (and I am not referring to moderators), I understand your concern. Most responders get that these are opinions, and as such, reasonable minds can disagree. Please do not be put off, because your knowledge makes your posts quite interesting. There are only a few who get a bit steamy in their disagreements, but for the most part, people are reasonably civil.
 
This is a friendly forum, however we can all disagree at times and voice our opinions. I think Lamutqueen brought up some valid points to what you posted and although I understand you took exception to the tone, it was completely unecessary to post what you did above. :)

Actually this is why i really like coming here. Whenever someone makes a statement, its not unusual at all be asked 'what's your source?" "how do you know that?" etc. It makes not only for a forum where the discussions get very interesting, it also makes what information that does come out in discussions reliable and not fragments of illumination. Of course we all tend to believe that when the source is a tabloid such as the DM and NotW and such, they're not known to be overly reliable and we take it as such. Now if I was to make a statement such as "Savannah has six toes" you can bet your bottom doughnut I'm going to be asked "and you know this how?" Clarification and backing up statements with sources are what makes TRF different than many message boards.
 
Actually this is why i really like coming here. Whenever someone makes a statement, its not unusual at all be asked 'what's your source?" "how do you know that?" etc. It makes not only for a forum where the discussions get very interesting, it also makes what information that does come out in discussions reliable and not fragments of illumination. Of course we all tend to believe that when the source is a tabloid such as the DM and NotW and such, they're not known to be overly reliable and we take it as such. Now if I was to make a statement such as "Savannah has six toes" you can bet your bottom doughnut I'm going to be asked "and you know this how?" Clarification and backing up statements with sources are what makes TRF different than many message boards.

Savannah has six toes? :ohmy: NO! Where did you read that? :lol:

I absolutely agree. We are all adults here and individuals with our own thoughts, experiences and opinions. If this forum only allowed people to post the most solicitous flowery comments that agree with others opinions, then we probably wouldn't be here. Debating is healthy and gives people something to think about from both sides.
 
You know I always assumed that any son or daughter of a Royal Prince automatically becomes a Prince or Princess at birth. It's very interesting to discover that is not the case. I learn something new here every day!
 
texankitcat said:
This is a friendly forum, however we can all disagree at times and voice our opinions. I think Lamutqueen brought up some valid points to what you posted and although I understand you took exception to the tone, it was completely unecessary to post what you did above. :)

If the poster felt the post was aggresive he should be allowed to comment as I am sure the original poster did not mean for the post to come off that way- sometimes things being read come off harsher then then intended.....but agree we do disagree and I do enjoy hearing the diffferent opinions/facts/and thoughts of posters..... sometimes they seem heated but I like to think with few exceptions noone means any offense :)

I also believe plp were told about the Queen,Charles, and the Middletons paying in order to offset any negative press in this bad economy as to way taxpayers are footing the bill and that's pretty common sense IMO- it's PR .......of course family will pay but they could have not annouced that at all but within seconds of engagement many were saying who's gonna pay for this wedding? There is nothing wrong with a bit of PR :) and it's the truth so even better!
 
Last edited:
I absolutely agree. We are all adults here and individuals with our own thoughts, experiences and opinions. If this forum only allowed people to post the most solicitous flowery comments that agree with others opinions, then we probably wouldn't be here. Debating is healthy and gives people something to think about from both sides.

Very well said.

As to the Queen granting William a title, I have to agree with Lumutqueen. I honestly don't see why there would be controversy about it.
 
Okay let's get back on topic.

As a reminder...if anyone has any concerns please contact any of the TRF moderators and/or Administrators via Private Message.

Zonk
TRF Administrator
 
Whether to name William to a duchy or not is not on the face of it an issue, for either is correct, although the former is a long-standing tradition. It just seems from what I read that everything is being rethought, especially where William is concerned, in terms of p.r. And he seems to want to be seen as very modern, so a dukedom just for the sake of a dukedom might seem to him somewhat antiquated.

I, for one, am intrigued to see what will be done in this matter, for if they do not give him a duchy, it will be an indication of change -- and of his determination to forge a different path for the monarchy. But at this point, it is anyone's guess...
 
If the poster felt the post was aggresive he should be allowed to comment as I am sure the original poster did not mean for the post to come off that way- sometimes things being read come off harsher then then intended.....but agree we do disagree and I do enjoy hearing the diffferent opinions/facts/and thoughts of posters..... sometimes they seem heated but I like to think with few exceptions noone means any offense :)

I also believe plp were told about the Queen,Charles, and the Middletons paying in order to offset any negative press in this bad economy as to way taxpayers are footing the bill and that's pretty common sense IMO- it's PR .......of course family will pay but they could have not annouced that at all but within seconds of engagement many were saying who's gonna pay for this wedding? There is nothing wrong with a bit of PR :) and it's the truth so even better!

I have no problem with the interpretation, just the manner in which it was addressed.

I heard that the Middletons offered to pay for the wedding dress, but hadn't heard about any other part of the costs for the receptions. It makes sense that they would offer to contribute towards the reception wedding/reception since they would have paid for her wedding anyway if she was marrying a non-royal.
 
The topic is a potential Title for William and Catherine.

Topic PLEASE :)
 
I will not be surprised if William receives an Earldom for now. I've said all along that I believe he will very much want to keep a lower profile when completing his millitary service, while at the same time not upstaging his father.

William automatically becomes The Duke of Cornwall the moment his father is King. I think giving him an Earldom makes sense and gives his wife an appropriate title to use.
 
Oh goodness. Has it already been discussed which earldoms are available?

Too many to list. Earldoms are usually based on counties, cities or towns, so the possibilities are quite large. And the extinct Royal Dukedoms of Cambridge, Sussex, Windsor, etc. could all be re-created as Earldoms instead for William.
 
Again, what is inappropriate about being Princess William? I won't be upset if he is made something else, but I don't understand all the fuss about an "appropriate" title for Kate. She'll be the heir to the heir's spouse, elevated to HRH and GOLLY GEE....
 
I agree with you, KittyAtlanta!

I can think of worse things!!!;)
 
I really like the idea of going by Princess William. It's historical and different and "cool" - sort of like when a commoner goes by Mrs. SoAndSo
 
Again, what is inappropriate about being Princess William? I won't be upset if he is made something else, but I don't understand all the fuss about an "appropriate" title for Kate. She'll be the heir to the heir's spouse, elevated to HRH and GOLLY GEE....

As a young, independent female, the thought of her being called Princess William gives me hives. There's an involuntary "oh h** no" that goes through my brain whenever it's suggested. I've never thought of myself as a feminist, but that prospect raises my feminist hackles. If the BRF wants to be a modern monarchy, that would be 500 steps in the wrong direction.
 
As a young, independent female, the thought of her being called Princess William gives me hives. There's an involuntary "oh h** no" that goes through my brain whenever it's suggested. I've never thought of myself as a feminist, but that prospect raises my feminist hackles. If the BRF wants to be a modern monarchy, that would be 500 steps in the wrong direction.


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.
 
I don't think it's particularly modern for Catherine to be styled as "HRH Princess William of Wales" upon marriage. It also seems inappropriate that the eldest son of The Prince of Wales wouldn't become a Peer on his wedding day.

We'll just have to wait and see.
 
As a young, independent female, the thought of her being called Princess William gives me hives. There's an involuntary "oh h** no" that goes through my brain whenever it's suggested. I've never thought of myself as a feminist, but that prospect raises my feminist hackles. If the BRF wants to be a modern monarchy, that would be 500 steps in the wrong direction.

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.

I agree, it gives me the creeps, too. "Just think, Brad, an hour ago she was plain Betty Monroe, now she's MRS. RALPH HAPSCHATT!" (if there are any Rocky Horror fans in this forum). Really?

OTOH, that's what the whole title thing is based on, and as a wife she takes the title and styles of her husband. It's OK, as long as they don't take it too seriously.
 
I'm actually leaning toward Duke of Clarence for William. King William IV was Duke of Clarence for 41 years before he became king. Why not give the same title to the prince who will probably one day become William V?
 
Just read this response to my post! Goodness! My first day as a newbie and I feel that the tone of the response [to which I will be replying to after work] seems rather aggressive. Lumutqueen doesn't seem to be using very courtly language.

Can someone tell me if this sort of treatment of fellow posters is usual?

Oh Dear, I thought I had joined a friendly forum, not an aggressive one.:)

Alex


Unfortunately over the last year or so and especially since the announcement of the engagement this board has become a lot more aggressive than it was in earlier times.

Welcome to the board and stick to your guns. Many posters here will attack you for your view (I know from personal experience) but your contributions will be welcomed.
 
I just have to comment on the use of titles. HRH Princess William is the eqiivalant to Mrs. John Jones in the commoner world. Here in the US I know many women who use their legal married names in private life and keep their maiden name professionally especially if they are Dr.'s lawyers etc.. Would there be any way for a royal to do something similiar.
 
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.

OUCH! :lol:
 
As a young, independent female, the thought of her being called Princess William gives me hives. There's an involuntary "oh h** no" that goes through my brain whenever it's suggested. I've never thought of myself as a feminist, but that prospect raises my feminist hackles. If the BRF wants to be a modern monarchy, that would be 500 steps in the wrong direction.

The BRF family may be trying to make a mondern monarchy, but its Queen is still rooted in tradition and a title will be given. Weather it be Princess William or something else I see nothig wrong with Princess William. Athough I perfer Duchess of Cambridge.

note: if I am wrong someone feel free to correct me... but even if William gets a Duke, Earl ect her full title and style will still be for example:

Her Royal Highness Princess William Arthur Philip Louis of Wales, Duchess of Cambridge... No matter what (unless the queen allows her to be Princess Catherine which i DON'T see happening) Kate will lose her first name untill she is;
HM Queen Catherine.(consort of course)
 
Last edited:
the morning of their wedding, Her Majesty will announce their titles.

1) Prince W
(no surprize there)

2) Princess Catherine


3/4),,Duke/Duchess of Clarence/Cambridge
 
As a young, independent female, the thought of her being called Princess William gives me hives. There's an involuntary "oh h** no" that goes through my brain whenever it's suggested. I've never thought of myself as a feminist, but that prospect raises my feminist hackles. If the BRF wants to be a modern monarchy, that would be 500 steps in the wrong direction.


As a young, independent female, I don't find offense in things that have nothing to do with me. The BRF is not like other monarchies; there isn't precedence for making commoners who marry into the royal family princesses in their own right. There just isn't. Princesses from other royal houses have married into the family (though the last was Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent), but that's different than Jane Doe doing it.

A woman who marries into the BRF takes her style from her husband. Camilla is HRH The Princess Charles, Princess of Wales, Duchess of Cornwall, so forth and so on. Sophie is HRH The Princess Edward, Countess of Wessex, so forth and so on. Catherine will be HRH Princess William of Wales, Duchess of X. That's how they do it. It's not offensive, it's not insulting, it's not degrading, it's not dehumanizing, it's not anything. It's not subjugating her, it's not shackling her barefoot and pregnant to the kitchen, it's not taking away her identity. She's still going to be Catherine, her name just won't be in her title until she's queen. Everyone is going to call her "Princess Kate" anyway, regardless of what title she actually ends up with, so who really cares? I mean seriously?
 
the morning of their wedding, Her Majesty will announce their titles.

1) Prince W
(no surprize there)

2) Princess Catherine


3/4),,Duke/Duchess of Clarence/Cambridge


She won't need to announce the Prince/Princess as that is automatice (except that it should be Princess William).

But the actual title they will have officially will be announced.

This morning's Channel 7 breakfast show said that the favourite for the title was 'Clarence', which had of course been used by the last eldest son of a Prince of Wales until his death (Eddy).
 
She won't need to announce the Prince/Princess as that is automatice (except that it should be Princess William).

But the actual title they will have officially will be announced.

This morning's Channel 7 breakfast show said that the favourite for the title was 'Clarence', which had of course been used by the last eldest son of a Prince of Wales until his death (Eddy).

I don't think I like the sound of it Duke of Clarence....nope not at all..:sad:
 
Being created Duke of Clarence makes the most sense to me. The last holder was the eldest son of Prince of Wales, Prince Albert Victor of Wales (Duke of Clarence and Avondale).

But it could be a total surprise too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom