Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children

[Iluvbertie]

I love the royals, but I don't get all the details that they are about. Why would Harry/Henry's children not be Prince/ss? His cousins are, and his child will be 5th in line (until William and Kate have another)

The 1917 LPs of George V.

The LPs cover the styles and titles of HRH Prince/Princess in the BRF with the exception of the younger children of William which are covered by the new LPs issused by The Queen in 31st December last year - although gazetted earlier this year.

The 1917 LPs state that HRH Prince/Princess is held by:

1. children of the monarch - Charles, Anne, Andrew, Edward

2. male-line grandchildren of the monarch - William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise, James, Richard, Edward, Michael, Alexandra

3. the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales - George

4. the wives of any males of the above - Camilla, Kate, Sophie, Brigitte, Katherine and Marie-Christine.

The new LPs issued by The Queen restore #3 above to the state they were in in 1898 when Queen Victoria made all the children of the future George V HRH Prince/Princesses - as they had been HH from birth until 1898.

As a result, unless The Queen issues new LPs to cover Harry's children, while she is Queen Harry's children will be born as Lord/Lady as he isn't the eldest son of the Prince of Wales.

His children would automatically become HRH Prince/Princess when Charles succeeds. However, if Charles predeceases The Queen then Harry's children would not meet the requirements under the 1917 LPs and would therefore need specific LPs, just as the younger children of William and Kate have them.

In 1948 George VI had to issue specific LPs to ensure that the about to be born 2nd in line to the throne was born HRH Prince/Princess. Had he not done so Charles would have been born as Lord Charles Mountbatten and known as Earl of Merioneth as a courtesy title from his father.

Harry's child - if born before William has a 2nd - will be 5th and a Lord sure but when Peter Phillips was born he was 5th in line and a plain Master (he was referred to as Master while a child).

 

[Ish]

Oh I see, got it!

With regards to titles, If Harry gets Duke of Sussex, would he have 'more' as Kate has Countess of Strathearn, Baroness Carrickfergus added on the end of her title.

The titles that Catherine has are all as courtesy because of her marriage. William was created Duke of Cambridge, Earl of Strathearn, and Baron of Carrickfergus, so his wife is entitled to use the feminine equivalent of any of them.

If, when he gets married, Harry is given a dukedom (which is likely) he'll likely also be given a couple secondary titles - likely an earldom and a barony. He could be given something else though - Edward was only made an Earl and a Viscount, with the expectation that he will one day be created DoE.

When Harry marries if he's not given a dukedom his wife will be HRH Princess Harry of Wales. If he is given a dukedom she'll be HRH Duchess of Wherever (or if he's given an Earldom she'll be HRH Countess of Wherever).

If they have a son while HM is still alive that son will likely be Earl of Wherever, using Harry's second highest title by courtesy. That son's eldest son will be Baron of Wherever. All other children of Harry will be styled as the younger sons or daughters of a duke (lord/lady).

 

[US Royal Watcher]

If they have a son while HM is still alive that son will likely be Earl of Wherever, using Harry's second highest title by courtesy. That son's eldest son will be Baron of Wherever. All other children of Harry will be styled as the younger sons or daughters of a duke (lord/lady).

Thanks for the explanation. Would Harry's eldest son use the title of "Earl" while Harry was still alive, or would he inherit the title upon Harry's death?

 

[Ish]

The way it works is (typically) that a peer uses his highest title, while his (or her, for that matter) heir apparent uses the second highest title by courtesy, while the heir apparent heir apparent uses the third highest title by courtesy.

So, look at the Duke of Kent. He is officially HRH Prince Edward, Duke of Kent, Earl of Saint Andrews, Baron Downpatrick, etc.

He goes by The Duke of Kent, while his eldest son (George Windsor) uses Earl of Saint Andrews by courtesy, while his son's eldest son (Edward Windsor) goes by Lord Downpatrick. The other children of the Duke of Kent are styled as the children of a Duke (Lord and Lady), while the other children of the Earl of Saint Andrews are (for now) styled as the children of an Earl (also The Honourable and Lady), while the (hypothetical) children of Lord Downpatrick would be styled as the children of a Baron (The Honourable).

These stylings will change when the Duke dies - then George Windsor will become the 2nd Duke of Kent, Edward will be styled as Earl of Saint Andrews and George's other children will be styled as the children of a Duke, and Edward's (hypothetical) heir apparent will be styled as Lord Downpatrick, and any other (hypothetical) children will be styled as the children of an Earl.

 

[NGalitzine]

^^^^
Assuming Harry's children are not princes then yes his eldest son would use the courtesy title of Earl, just the same way that Prince Edwards son uses the courtesy title Viscount Severn.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Thanks, Ish. I really appreciate your expertise.

 

[Ish]

^^^^
Assuming Harry's children are not princes then yes his eldest son would use the courtesy title of Earl, just the same way that Prince Edwards son uses the courtesy title Viscount Severn.

I always try to avoid using the Wessexes just because they're this murky grey zone - Edward is an individual who normally would have been given a dukedom, but hasn't been (yet), and his children are individuals who normally would be HRHs but aren't.

I think Edward, pre-marriage, just went "I am going to confuse all the people!" And that's why he and his family have the titles and styles they have.

Thanks, Ish. I really appreciate your expertise.

Not a problem! Glad to be of use.

 

[Queen Shirley]

Why is it wrong to refer to William at Prince William and Princess Catherine? Isn't that one of their titles?

 

[Queen Shirley]

So let's see if I got this. Williams children will all be Prince/Princess, no matter if there is 1 or 10. Harrys children will be all different. The first child will have one of his secondary titles. But all the rest of the children after that will only get titles if the Queen/King gives them one. Is this right????

 

[Ish]

Why is it wrong to refer to William at Prince William and Princess Catherine? Isn't that one of their titles?

A royal dukedom is greater than a Prince, which is why William is referred as HRH Duke of Cambridge instead of simply Prince William. He can also be referred to as HRH Prince William, Duke of Cambridge.

Catherine is not now, nor under the current system will she ever be Princess Catherine. The only time her name will ever be involved with her titles is when she is Queen (and even then not likely). Her titles are all by courtesy of her husband and where a name is involved it is his, not hers.

If William didn't have his dukedom and was still HRH Prince William of Wales then Catherine would be HRH Princess William of Wales. Because William has a dukedom, she is instead HRH Duchess of Cambridge.

In the future she will likely be HRH Duchess of Cornwall, HRH Princess of Wales (when Charles is King), HM The Queen (when William is King), HM Queen Catherine (when George is King).

So let's see if I got this. Williams children will all be Prince/Princess, no matter if there is 1 or 10. Harrys children will be all different. The first child will have one of his secondary titles. But all the rest of the children after that will only get titles if the Queen/King gives them one. Is this right????

William's children will all be Prince(ss) because letters patent were issued making them such. Harry's children will be Prince(ss) when they are the grandchildren of the monarch. If they are not the grandchildren of the monarch then they will either be styled as the child of a Prince (Lord/Lady) or the child of whatever peerage Harry has. If Harry has secondary titles then his heir apparent (typically the first born son) will use that as a title.

It's not all that likely that Harry's children will be given any titles beyond what they get from being Harry's child or Charles' grandchild. Their position will be similar to that of the Kents, Gloucesters, and Yorks - their father will be the son of the monarch and bestowed a peerage as a result, but they will only be the grandchild of the monarch and not in the direct line of succession, so they will not be bestowed with any peerages.

 

[Iluvbertie]

With Harry - he will most likely get a dukedom that will be inheritable by his eldest son/daughter if the LPs allow that.

The Queen may issue LPs creating ALL his children as HRH Prince/Princess as she did for William's children or leave them as the children of a Duke until Charles becomes King in which case Harry and his wife could decide whether or not to keep them as the children of a peer, in the way that Edward's children are now, or change them to Prince/Princess in the way that Andrew's children are.

As these children won't be able to pass on the HRH to anyone - unless something awful happens and Harry ends up with the throne - there is an argument for not having them have HRH Prince/Princess as they would be the Beatrice and Eugenie of their generation and we see the flack these girls get for being HRH Princesses.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

A royal dukedom is greater than a Prince, which is why William is referred as HRH Duke of Cambridge instead of simply Prince William. He can also be referred to as HRH Prince William, Duke of Cambridge.

Until I joined this forum, I didn't realize that a royal dukedom is greater than a prince. After all, little girls do not read fairytales in which the heroine marries a Duke.

It's also confusing for Americans because of the focus on Charles as the "Prince of Wales" rather than the "Duke of Wales." A prince just sounds like a better title. It's interesting that even the British media incorrectly referred to Diana as "Princess Diana."

Regarding Harry's children, it is hard for me to believe that he will want them to be HRHs. Both he and William are so informal, neither of them insist on being called "sir" or "your royal highness." I can't see him requesting that his children be addressed that way.

 

[Kotroman]

Regarding Harry's children, it is hard for me to believe that he will want them to be HRHs. Both he and William are so informal, neither of them insist on being called "sir" or "your royal highness." I can't see him requesting that his children be addressed that way.

I find that hard to believe. What do they like to be called then? Mr Wales? Señor Harry? Wills?

 

[Osipi]

I find that hard to believe. What do they like to be called then? Mr Wales? Señor Harry? Wills?

I do remember one example when William went to Australia and New Zealand following disasters that happened there. People that were introduced to him reported that he was very informal stating "Just call me William". He was meeting with families that had been affected by the disasters and I thought it was compassionate of William to make them know that the focus was on them and not him as a royal.

I believe Harry is the same way but at the moment I don't have any recollection of Harry's informality but I'm sure someone else will.

 

[Pranter]

I find that hard to believe. What do they like to be called then? Mr Wales? Señor Harry? Wills?

As I understand it they go by the last name of Wales while working in the military.

Based on everything I've heard/read they seem pretty informal and are addressed by their first names.


LaRae

 

[US Royal Watcher]

I find that hard to believe. What do they like to be called then? Mr Wales? Señor Harry? Wills?

This is one source. I've read many articles that both William and Harry prefer to be addressed as "William" and "Harry."

Raising Royal Heirs: What William and Kate Can Expect | Anglophenia | BBC America

 

[Queen Shirley]

Then if Catherine can never be a Princess, then Diana was never a Princess. Right?? I don't want to offend anyone, I think they should be but who am I. lol

 

[NGalitzine]

Correct. Diana was Princess of Wales but she was never ever Princess Diana no matter how often the press and the public called her that.

 

[royal-blue]

I think it would be beneficial to the long term plan of a leaner, meaner monarchy if Harry's children were untitled and were free to lead normal lives. A lot depends on how many children William has and how late in life Harry becomes a dad.

 

[Ish]

Until I joined this forum, I didn't realize that a royal dukedom is greater than a prince. After all, little girls do not read fairytales in which the heroine marries a Duke.

It's basically...

To be a peer is great (you're a noble!), but to be a prince is better (you're a royal!), but to be a prince and a peer is even better (you're both!).

In the British sense, the dream is to marry a Prince (who then becomes a Duke as well), so you can be a royal Duchess.

It's also confusing for Americans because of the focus on Charles as the "Prince of Wales" rather than the "Duke of Wales." A prince just sounds like a better title. It's interesting that even the British media incorrectly referred to Diana as "Princess Diana."

Prince of Wales is (I believe) a peerage as well. It's like a dukedom, but higher, and the reason why it's a "Prince" is because it's a hold over from when Wales was independent.

Basically, if a title is Title of Wherever (or Name, Title of Wherever) then it's (usually) a peerage, but if it's Title Name of Wherever it's something else.

Regarding Harry's children, it is hard for me to believe that he will want them to be HRHs. Both he and William are so informal, neither of them insist on being called "sir" or "your royal highness." I can't see him requesting that his children be addressed that way.

Harry won't have to request for his children be called HRHs, it will be automatic once Charles is king, although he could go the route of Edward and request that they aren't titled as such.

My thought is that it would be better for the long term monarchy if Harry's children do become HRHs because HRHs are typically expected to work for the Firm as adults. In 30 years from now the monarchy is going to be smaller by natural means, and it's going to have to start restricting what it can do if it's too small.

Then if Catherine can never be a Princess, then Diana was never a Princess. Right?? I don't want to offend anyone, I think they should be but who am I. lol

Diana was never a princess.

Her titles, from birth to death were:

1961-1975: The Honourable Diana Frances Spencer
1975-1981: Lady Diana Frances Spencer (after her father became Earl Spencer)
1981-1996: HRH The Princess of Wales and Countess of Chester, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Rothesay (after he marriage)
1996-1997: Diana, Princess of Wales

Catherine, meanwhile went from being Miss Catherine Elizabeth Middleton to HRH Princess William, Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Steathearn, Baroness of Carrickfergus.

She can look forward to becoming, in order:

1. HRH Princess of Wales and Countess of Chester, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Rothesay, Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Steathearn, Baroness of Carrickfergus
2. HM The Queen
3. HM Queen Catherine (possibly with the Queen Mother included).

 

[QueenMathilde]

A royal dukedom is greater than a Prince, which is why William is referred as HRH Duke of Cambridge instead of simply Prince William. He can also be referred to as HRH Prince William, Duke of Cambridge.

Catherine is not now, nor under the current system will she ever be Princess Catherine. The only time her name will ever be involved with her titles is when she is Queen (and even then not likely). Her titles are all by courtesy of her husband and where a name is involved it is his, not hers.

If William didn't have his dukedom and was still HRH Prince William of Wales then Catherine would be HRH Princess William of Wales. Because William has a dukedom, she is instead HRH Duchess of Cambridge.

In the future she will likely be HRH Duchess of Cornwall, HRH Princess of Wales (when Charles is King), HM The Queen (when William is King), HM Queen Catherine (when George is King).



William's children will all be Prince(ss) because letters patent were issued making them such. Harry's children will be Prince(ss) when they are the grandchildren of the monarch. If they are not the grandchildren of the monarch then they will either be styled as the child of a Prince (Lord/Lady) or the child of whatever peerage Harry has. If Harry has secondary titles then his heir apparent (typically the first born son) will use that as a title.

It's not all that likely that Harry's children will be given any titles beyond what they get from being Harry's child or Charles' grandchild. Their position will be similar to that of the Kents, Gloucesters, and Yorks - their father will be the son of the monarch and bestowed a peerage as a result, but they will only be the grandchild of the monarch and not in the direct line of succession, so they will not be bestowed with any peerages.

They're saying the same thing with Camilla - she can't be a Queen because to be a Queen you have to be born into the family not married onto it? So like Phillip is just a prince and not "King Phillip" Camilla and Kate won't be called queen but Princess? King William and Princess Kate? Is that right?

 

[Iluvbertie]

Catherine won't become HRH Princess of Wales immediately.

Her future titles are:

HRH The Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge, The Duchess of Rothesay, Countess of Carrick, Countess of Straethern, Baroness Renfrew, Baronees Carrickferfus

When and if William is created Prince of Wales she will then add Princess of Wales and Countess of Chester to her titles but keep all of the rest.

 

[Ish]

They're saying the same thing with Camilla - she can't be a Queen because to be a Queen you have to be born into the family not married onto it? So like Phillip is just a prince and not "King Phillip" Camilla and Kate won't be called queen but Princess? King William and Princess Kate? Is that right?

No.

There is a debate that Camilla should/will be titled Princess Consort when Charles becomes king out of a personal preference/deference to his first wife, all that jazz. Whether or not this actually happens and how it comes about is yet to be seen - we won't know until it happens. I'm being a bit lazy here by not going into the whole thing but it's a huge can of worms. A thread on it can be found here: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f44/title-for-camilla-part-4-a-17970.html

The issue with Philip is that a man does not take his spouse's titles. Philip cannot be called king because he is not the king. Similarly, Anne's husbands were never Princes, Beatrice and Eugenie's future husbands will not be Princes, and Zara's husband did not become Mr. Zara Phillips.

Women, however, typically take their husband's titles. Diana became the Princess of Wales on her marriage because her husband was the Prince of Wales. Camilla became Duchess of Cornwall for the same reason, similarly with Catherine and the Duchess of Cambridge, Sophie and Countess of Wessex, Zara and Mrs. Mike Tindall. Women take the female equivalent of their husband's titles.

Catherine will never be Princess Catherine because she's not a blood princess, but she will likely one day become Queen because she is married to a man who will likely one day become King and she takes the female equivalent of his titles.

 

[NGalitzine]

Would you perhaps have preferred the phrase "highly unlikely" since Cathernie has the use of the female version of her husbands titles while Philip did not enjoy such a privelege. HM merely restored to Philip a title he gave up when he became a naturalized British citizen and commmoner as Lt Philip Mountbatten. As long as Catherine is still married to William and not a widow she has no need of an independent styling as Princess Catherine so I do believe it is highly unlikely that HM will make Catherine a princess in her own right.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Is there a place where I can read Prince Philip's titles in a similar progression?

 

[Ish]

Is there a place where I can read Prince Philip's titles in a similar progression?

1921-1947: HRH Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark
1947: Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten
1947: HRH Sir Philip Mountbatten
1947-1957: HRH The Duke of Edinburgh
1957-Present: HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

In addition to DoE, he's also Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich.

 

[Iluvbertie]

As the titular dignity of prince/ss is entirely within the gift of the sovereign, it is not accurate to say Catherine (or Harry's future wife) will never be Princess Catherine. The Queen made Philip a British Prince and William in the future, can just as easily do the same for Catherine. It is entirely up to the sovereign of the time.

I doubt very much that William would make Kate a Princess as by the time he is in a position to do she would be Queen, unless you suggesting that they will bedivorced and he would make he a princess as the mother of the heir to the throne.

 

[Ish]

I doubt very much that William would make Kate a Princess as by the time he is in a position to do she would be Queen, unless you suggesting that they will bedivorced and he would make he a princess as the mother of the heir to the throne.

I guess there's also the possibility that William dies without becoming King and Catherine pulls a Princess Alice.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Thank you, Ish. So, Prince Philip remains HRH while Duchess Catherine, as Queen, would be HM? (Although now I don't see the earlier post).

 

[Ish]

Thank you, Ish. So, Prince Philip remains HRH while Duchess Catherine, as Queen, would be HM? (Although now I don't see the earlier post).

Not a problem.

Kings and Queens are HMs. In Britain, Princess and Princesses are HRHs (they're also HRHs elsewhere, but they can have a number of different types of Highness elsewhere). As Philip is only a Prince he is HRH, and as Catherine will be a Queen she will be HM.