Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children

[Iluvbertie]

Until Edward the children of all sons of a monarch had been HRH's but that tradition went out the window in 1999 with Edward's request for his children to be the children of an Earl rather than Princes/Princesses.

A lot of the criticism of Andrew and the girls is that he didn't do the same thing - that he should have insisted that they not have HRHs when they were born.

If the rumours are true about reducing the working royals to the monarch, spouse, monarchs children and their spouses then there is no need for the children of any child of the monarch other than the heir to have HRH (and I suspect Charles may very well issue such LPs - to limit HRH to the children of the monarch, the spouses of the children of the monarch and the children of the heir apparent but not of second and subsequent children. With William's second child not being eligible to pass on HRH under the existing LPs it would seem to make sense to limit it in some way - otherwise we could get a situation where the children of the 2nd child aren't HRHs but the children of the 3rd child are but that the children of the 2nd child are higher in the line of succession)

If William and Kate have a third child who is a boy then that sons children will be HRHs when William is King but not the children of Charlotte even though Charlotte's children would be higher in the line of succession (unlike Anne who remained behind her brothers under the Succession to the Crown Act). It is also clear that the British public don't see a need for the cousins to be working royals so Harry's children won't be needed so why burden them with HRHs. Far better for them to be raised as Lord/Lady and even not having that many appearances on the balcony e.g. Anne's grandchildren have not appeared on the balcony. It is even rare now to see her children there and that I suspect is what the British public want to see - the core family only on the balcony not the extended family.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

Albany isn't available as it currently in 'abeyance' under the 1917 Titles Deprivation Act but there are living claimants - the male line descendants of Queen Victoria's son, Leopold. While any such descendants live that title, along with Cumberland, isn't available for regrant. There are currently 13 such males in the line of succession to the Albany title with the most recent born in 2015 so it will be some time before this title is available again.

Under the 1917 LPs Harry's children aren't entitled to HRH until Charles is King. As Charles is reportedly wanting a smaller royal family I can see him encouraging Harry to not have his children have HRH - and given the attitude of so many people to Beatrice and Eugenie being HRHs I suspect Harry will follow Edward's lead and not have his children so styled to prevent that same animosity towards his children when they are young adults and surplus to requirements.

But, to clarify for myself, the Queen could (if Harry has kids before her passing) make Harry's children HRH's correct?


LaRae

[Pranter]

I'd like to see Sussex or Clarence used.


LaRae

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by Pranter

But, to clarify for myself, the Queen could (if Harry has kids before her passing) make Harry's children HRH's correct?


LaRae

Yes, just like she ensured Charlotte was. If the queen didn't issue a lp Charlotte would not have been a Hrh until her Grabdfather was king.

If Elizabeth chooses, yes she can make Harry's kids HRH.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Countessmeout

Yes, just like she ensured Charlotte was. If the queen didn't issue a lp Charlotte would not have been a Hrh until her Grabdfather was king.

If Elizabeth chooses, yes she can make Harry's kids HRH.

Ok thanks...I thought so but then figured I'd better ask.


LaRae

[Curryong]

Lady Louse Wessex and her brother James, Viscount Severn, have been seen on the BP balcony for Trooping of the Colour ceremonies quite a lot and they aren't HRHs.

Why would Charles want to prevent his own grandchildren by Harry from being seen at Trooping of the Colour and other extended family occasions? Or for that matter, William prevent his brother and nieces and nephews (if Harry has children) from doing so when he is King? They will be the only ones from his side of the family!

There's been a lot spoken about 'the core Royal Family' in future years on this Forum. However it's notable that Harry was there among the reduced group on the BP balcony in Jubilee Year. So perhaps the Queen and the Prince of Wales do regard Harry as part of the 'core' family (unlike some posters here) and that when Charles comes to the throne both his children and their spouses will be on that balcony and playing their part in the life and duties of the BRF.

Also, none of us know what Charles may or may not do with regard to Harry's children. He may issue LP making them HRHs. He may not. At the moment the possibility that he will do so are as great as those that he will not.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Lady Louse Wessex and her brother James, Viscount Severn, have been seen on the BP balcony for Trooping of the Colour ceremonies quite a lot and they aren't HRHs.

Why would Charles want to prevent his own grandchildren by Harry from being seen at Trooping of the Colour and other extended family occasions? Or for that matter, William prevent his brother and nieces and nephews (if Harry has children) from doing so when he is King? They will be the only ones from his side of the family!

There's been a lot spoken about 'the core Royal Family' in future years on this Forum. However it's notable that Harry was there among the reduced group on the BP balcony in Jubilee Year. So perhaps the Queen and the Prince of Wales do regard Harry as part of the 'core' family (unlike some posters here) and that when Charles comes to the throne both his children and their spouses will be on that balcony and playing their part in the life and duties of the BRF.

Also, none of us know what Charles may or may not do with regard to Harry's children. He may issue LP making them HRHs. He may not. At the moment the possibility that he will do so are as great as those that he will not.

Charles doesn't need to issue LPs to make Harry's children HRHs. Under the current 1917 LPs still in force. they will automatically become HRHs when Charles is king. Queen Elizabeth II on the other hand would have to issue LPs to make Harry's children HRHs during her reign, which I am pretty sure she wouldn't do as it would go against tradition and precedent.

Charlotte's case is different BTW as the eldest son of the eldest living son of the Prince of Wales (i.e., currently Prince George) was already automatically an HRH under the 1917 LPs. The Queen simply extended that rule to all children of the eldest living son of the Prince of Wales.

[Iluvbertie]

If the image from the Jubilee of the 'core' of the royal family is defined by who was there on that day then it is:

the monarch and spouse (although Philip was in hospital)
the heir and spouse
the children of the heir and spouses

That means that the younger siblings and their children aren't part of the 'core' of the family so in time Harry would cease to be part of the 'core' in his brother's reign and his children would never make that criteria.

The Queen's view of the royal family is one that is very large including cousins and their children and grandchildren and even more extended than that - based on who she allows on the balcony for Trooping.

In Charles' reign I suspect that quite a few of those who are regulars there today won't be invited at all and that the numbers will reduce again under William.

The British public see that huge crowd up there and believe, erroneously, that they are paying directly for all of them so the perception of a smaller royal family is as important as having one for the future of the monarchy. Charles and William are aware of this and we will see it pretty quickly.

I don't believe Charles intends to stop anyone who currently undertakes royal duties from doing so but he won't add anyone to the list that works now - other than maybe Harry's wife, assuming he marries. When the Kent's, Gloucester's and The Queen's younger children either pass away or retire they won't be replaced until George starts doing duties. I also wouldn't be surprised if, in time, Charlotte is allowed to live a normal life rather than be expected to undertake the mind-numbingly boring ribbon cutting that the minor royals do now.

[JR76]

I've been of the opinion for quite some time now that if Harry marries & have children they will be styled like his Wessex cousins. If not, & if the Letters patent of 1917 isn't amended, we'll soon be in the same situation again with an extended clan of royals which apparently is what Charles wants to move away from.

[Skippyboo]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Charles doesn't need to issue LPs to make Harry's children HRHs. Under the current 1917 LPs still in force. they will automatically become HRHs when Charles is king. Queen Elizabeth II on the other hand would have to issue LPs to make Harry's children HRHs during her reign, which I am pretty sure she wouldn't do as it would go against tradition and precedent.

Charlotte's case is different BTW as the eldest son of the eldest living son of the Prince of Wales (i.e., currently Prince George) was already automatically an HRH under the 1917 LPs. The Queen simply extended that rule to all children of the eldest living son of the Prince of Wales.

The issued the LP for all of the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales to be HRHs in late 2012. So this was right after the announcement of Kate's first pregnancy. So at the time, it was not known that the baby was George. If was a girl, she would have been a future Queen but not a HRH Princess from birth without the new LPs.

William's children will be the monarch, children of the monarch and siblings of the monarch. All of these positions have been working royals. A niece or nephew isn't always a working royal.

Harry's kids by the time they are old enough to do royal work, their uncle will most likely be on the throne, George and Charlotte will be adults and their maybe other Cambridge children who aren't born yet at or nearing adulthood.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Skippyboo

The issued the LP for all of the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales to be HRHs in late 2012. So this was right after the announcement of Kate's first pregnancy. So at the time, it was not known that the baby was George. If was a girl, she would have been a future Queen but not a HRH Princess from birth without the new LPs.

That is correct, Skippyboo. Thanks for pointing that out !

Personally, I don't see an objective reason though for the HRH style to be restricted to the heir's children only. It would only be a problem if HRH status came with special privileges or access to public funding, but that is no longer necessarily the case.

[Rudolph]

If Harry's children aren't expected to be part of the working Firm, I see no reason why he would want HRH for his children.

Beatrice and Eugenie are prime examples what having a fancy title and no formal role can do to someone.

In fact, I think Eugenie would give it up her HRH tomorrow is she could.

[JR76]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

If Harry's children aren't expected to be part of the working Firm, I see no reason why he would want HRH for his children.



Beatrice and Eugenie are prime examples what having a fancy title and no formal role can do to someone.



In fact, I think Eugenie would give it up her HRH tomorrow is she could.

Unless Andrew stops it I'm sure she'd be glad to do like Patricia of Connaught and renounce her title upon marriage. Lady Eugenie has a nice ring to it.

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by JR76

I've been of the opinion for quite some time now that if Harry marries & have children they will be styled like his Wessex cousins. If not, & if the Letters patent of 1917 isn't amended, we'll soon be in the same situation again with an extended clan of royals which apparently is what Charles wants to move away from.

Charles doesn't want an extended working royals. There us a difference.

I don't get why people care. 5 HRH or 500, it costs the same. HRH doesn't come with a salary, house or privilege of any kind. If Harry's kids are not HRH they will still attend trooping and other events, and will still need security costs.

The family is slimming down anyways without eliminating Harry's kids.

Honestly people complain about not seeing royaks enough, how they don't work enough. When Charles is king, even if Harry and William double what they do now, it won't even be a tenth of what royals do now. Charles can't afford to slim down his siblings or eliminate his nieces. Not at least until his grandkids, including Harry's, are old enough.

In reality the continent gets it right. Younger siblings have titles yes, but they are encouraged like in the Netherlands to have careers. They do royal duties from time to time, but still are private. Charles wants to slim down he should embrace that. Encourage people like the yorks to fight what they do, have private jobs and lives, while still attending bigger events and having patronages. Giving court circular recognition to their work would not visit Charles any money. They font get funding for staff anyways.

[Rudolph]

A title makes a difference, especially with the kind of press coverage you receive.

Look at Zara and Peter, or even James and Louise, compared to Beatrice and Eugenie.

And the fact is the perception of titles does evolve. Not that long ago we could expect earldoms for husbands of the Yorks. Do it today and people would be in the streets.

I can easily see Harry and his American wife saying "you know what, let's do what the Queen and uncle Edward did with his children. They have the best of both worlds"

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

If Harry's children aren't expected to be part of the working Firm, I see no reason why he would want HRH for his children.

Beatrice and Eugenie are prime examples what having a fancy title and no formal role can do to someone.

In fact, I think Eugenie would give it up her HRH tomorrow is she could.

I see no reason why he would NOT want his children to be styled HRH. of course he would want it. Titles are important to them
I can't see what "harm" its doing to Bea and Eugenie to have the title of Princess and no formal role. they can do occasional royal duties and be seen as part of the RF at times but still have the freedom to have a job.. if they want it.. There's nothing to stop Eugenie just being known as Eugenie Mountbatten Windsor, and going to her office every day, if she wants to.

[Rudolph]

Why not just make everyone a royal highness then? The public doesn't care, no harm in having a title.

The Queen and Prince Edward certainly took the view 'HRH' was a burden for minor royals and Harry's children will be minor royals.

I don't think Harry has the same attachment to titles as Prince Andrew

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Denville

I see no reason why he would NOT want his children to be styled HRH. of course he would want it. Titles are important to them

I can't see what "harm" its doing to Bea and Eugenie to have the title of Princess and no formal role. they can do occasional royal duties and be seen as part of the RF at times but still have the freedom to have a job.. if they want it.. There's nothing to stop Eugenie just being known as Eugenie Mountbatten Windsor, and going to her office every day, if she wants to.

You only have to look at the treatment Beatrice and Eugenia get as opposed to what Zara and Peter received to see why Henry wouldn't want his children to have HRHs. You can tell from the way he's spoken about his life and his very clear abhorrence to the press intrusion he receives, that he wouldn't want that for his children.

You're right there's nothing stopping Eugenie from informally dropping her HRH. But she'll still hold it, she'd still be in the limelight and she still get the intrusion, so why would she? Eugenie does go to her office every day, and frankly we rarely see "everyday" pictures of her anymore. Eugenie lives her life quite ordinarily and for the press that's not news.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Why not just make everyone a royal highness then? The public doesn't care, no harm in having a title.

The Queen and Prince Edward certainly took the view 'HRH' was a burden for minor royals and Harry's children will be minor royals.

I don't think Harry has the same attachment to titles as Prince Andrew

I don't believe that was why Ed's children weren't to use their titles.. it was because at the time of his marriage and starting a family they were trying to keep a lower profile. However IMO they are entitled to their HRH's and should use them. Unless they really don't wish to.
I don't see that being HRH has done the York girls any harm. if they are not overly popular its because neiter of them does anyting interesting, and they are the children of 2 fairly unpopular people, Andrew and Sarah..

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Denville

I don't believe that was why Ed's children weren't to use their titles.. it was because at the time of his marriage and starting a family they were trying to keep a lower profile. However IMO they are entitled to their HRH's and should use them. Unless they really don't wish to.

Depending on which way you look at it Louise and James have HRHs. There was no formal LP/document released to take it away from them, they are male line grandchildren. Edward and Sophie chose to have their children brought up and styled as those of an Earl. You have to look at the childrens ages as well, they're of school age. I imagine we rarely saw much of Beatrice and Eugenie when they were at school. Frankly right now we see more of Mia, Savannah and Isla then we do of Louise and James.

Originally Posted by Denville

I don't see that being HRH has done the York girls any harm. if they are not overly popular its because neiter of them does anyting interesting, and they are the children of 2 fairly unpopular people, Andrew and Sarah..

Both Beatrice and Eugenie have very much taken on the sins of their parents which is unfortunate because neither of them has ever done anything to justify the consistent barrage of hate they receive from the press or DFail commentators. In regards them doing anything interesting, in 2012 William (putting him at Beatrice's age) was at RAF Valley with Catherine. In 2013, Henry was just returning from Afghanistan and remained in the army. Both boys didn't face the any significant press unless they were "out in the public". Frankly out of all four of them, IMO, Beatrice has done the most interesting things in her life.