Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children

[miss whirley]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

As I've said before, if this doesn't happen, the press will be sure to make it into a slam against Meghan, regardless of any explanations the RF offers.

I think we'll see the opposite. If Harry and Meghan's kids aren't royal, the media will praise H&M much the same way they do Anne for not giving her kids titles and the Wessexes for having similar foresight.

The media won't care about the logical explanation, that H&M's kids were never entitled to a HRH under HM's reign, just like they don't care that Peter and Zara were never going to be HRHs under the existing LPs. It will just be praise about how 'refreshing' and 'down to earth' they are. And certainly they would use it as an excuse to bash the Yorks for being self-important and unlike the rest.

[NoShades]

Originally Posted by Alisa

I disagree with the opinion that Harry and his kids will be insignificant as time goes on.

Think about it
When Queen Elizabeth passes away and King Charles reign there will be only two children of the monarch:
William-heir
Harry-spare
That's it. Therefore during the reign of King Charles the Cambridge kids are still going to be young (teenagers perhaps) to assume the duty as full time royals.
So Prince Harry and (Meghan) are going to have a much higher profile.

Secondly if William does become King in the next 20-25 years ( sorry I don't foresee a long reign for Charles), it is true that the Cambridge kids will dominate the media and tabloids. HOWEVER! I don't see William and Kate pushing them to assume the role of full time royals any sooner than they have to so again the only people close to the monarch who can do that is Harry and his Duchess!

Completely agree.

[Osipi]

What has the media to do with all this? Is this our new past time? Speculating on what the media will or will not do? Gads, I can't wait for the silly season to be over with.

In all actuality, what will happen with Harry and his family's titles is that the right thing will be done for the monarchy. Its probably already been decided on and ready to implement for when Harry does wake up on his wedding day.

As far as the media, there is one one thing I can be absolutely sure about. They won't be silent. They never are.

[LauraS3514]

Originally Posted by Alisa

I disagree with the opinion that Harry and his kids will be insignificant as time goes on.

Think about it
When Queen Elizabeth passes away and King Charles reign there will be only two children of the monarch:
William-heir
Harry-spare
That's it.

But Harry is no longer "the spare" to Charles/William. That's now George. Harry may eventually be the younger son of The King, and later still the brother of The King, but he will never again be "the spare" unless there is unspeakable tragedy.

[Jacknch]

Several off-topic posts have been deleted. This thread is for discussing titles and styles of Harry, his future wife and children.

Common sense tells us that titles and styles conveyed upon members of the royal family do not relate to the popularity of the individual (either by the public or the press) so lets not compare the popularity of Prince Harry against other members of the Royal Family.

[angieuk]

https://www.britroyals.com/royaltree.asp


https://www.britroyals.com/plantagenettree.asp


This is where the answer lies; as the family are HRH's no matter what. Time has not changed the ruling, unless they were born outside of marriage. [Applies to Sons only].

Harry's Titles for his children/grandchildren would be the same, regardless of Prince William's reign. I.e. HRH's. (Only female grandchildren would be excluded).

[Iluvbertie]

What do you mean 'the family are HRH's no matter what'?

George V's LPs, which are the current ones in force, are very clear. Harry's children won't be HRH's until Charles is King.

Under the 1917 LPs the HRHs are limited.

The Queen can issue new LPs - as she did in 2012 to ensure that all of William's children would be born HRH as otherwise only George would have been born with HRH while Charlotte and the new baby would be Lord/Lady Mountbatten-Windsor until Charles becomes King.

Why go back into family trees when each monarch has the right themselves to decide who will or won't have the style of HRH.

When Edward VIII was born, for instance, he was born HH not HRH. It wasn't until 1898 that Queen Victoria issued LPs to raise all of George V's children to HRH status.

He then amended those LPs and HM has amended those of her grandfather for William's children.

The Queen can also let her will be known and thus strip people of HRH - as she has done with Louise and James (according to the letter I have from BP answering that very question).

Under the existing LPs if Charles never becomes King, and no special LPs are issued, then Harry's children are never HRHs as they are never male-line grandchildren of the monarch, only great-grandchildren.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by miss whirley

I think we'll see the opposite. If Harry and Meghan's kids aren't royal, the media will praise H&M much the same way they do Anne for not giving her kids titles and the Wessexes for having similar foresight.

The media won't care about the logical explanation, that H&M's kids were never entitled to a HRH under HM's reign, just like they don't care that Peter and Zara were never going to be HRHs under the existing LPs. It will just be praise about how 'refreshing' and 'down to earth' they are. And certainly they would use it as an excuse to bash the Yorks for being self-important and unlike the rest.

It is not up to Princess Anne to give or not give her children titles. Grandchildren of a sovereign in maternal line never had titles unless they got it from their fathers. Anne in that sense is not different from Princess Margaret, or Princess Mary (George VI's sister), or any of Queen Victoria's daughters.

The Wessexes case is in turn more controversial. I suppose most people are neutral about James and Louise not having royal titles, but there are others, albeit probably a minority, who actually think that, by not being acknowledged as HRHs. James and Louise have been unfairly robbed of their birthright under the 1917 LPs.

[Denville]

Anne could have had a title of nobility for her husband but she and he chose not to have one.

[angieuk]

Iluvbertie

Now I understand what you mean; i.e. each Monarch deals with things differently.

I had assumed (wrongly), that the rules were in place many centuries ago, but apparently not so. Your explanation was very well explained; and now I finally get it!! Why some are HRH, and some are not HRH.

Looking back at past Royal Families its interesting that some illegitimate sons were still given Royal titles by the Monarch.

Thanks for your excellent explanation.

[scriptgirl]

Could Harry possibly be made the Duke of St James?

I am hoping he gets the Duke of Suffolk. On a side note, I would love if Harry were to settle in St James Palace instead of Kensington. I feel he should be seperate from William. Is there a reason the royals could not live in Kew or Hampton Palace?

[Iluvbertie]

Could but highly unlikely as the official seat of the British monarchy is the Court of St James. St James is thus more associated with the monarch him/herself rather than an increasingly minor member of the family and there is no way they would want that the St James title would be associated with a non-royal which in two generations it would be if given to Harry.

[Osipi]

To be absolutely honest here, I think the title that Harry wants and craves on the personal level the most is one word and that word is "Daddy".

[Alisa]

I think so too!😍

[Rhea6]

^Agree ! I'm sure as soon as they are married one of the first to do lists will be to have a baby of their own !

[cepe]

Originally Posted by scriptgirl

I am hoping he gets the Duke of Suffolk. On a side note, I would love if Harry were to settle in St James Palace instead of Kensington. I feel he should be seperate from William. Is there a reason the royals could not live in Kew or Hampton Palace?

They are owned and managed by Historic Royal Palaces (charity) who also run the Royal apartments at KP - all of which are open to the public all of the time.

No private accommodation available.

The benefit of KP is that as long as he is carrying out royal engagements, Harry lives there rent free - and it is also v secure.

[wyevale]

Is there a reason the royals could not live in Kew or Hampton Palace?

Both of these Palaces [altho' Kew is really more of a House] ceased being Royal residences in the early in Queen Victoria's reign, are now open to the Public, and slap bang in the middle of Public parks. So it is neither practical nor convenient to return them to residences for members of the Royal Family.

[Furienna]

If we should trust this article, Harry will become Duke of Sussex: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_of_Sussex

[Jacknch]

Please note that discussion on a future home for Prince Harry may take place in the http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...rry-26891.html thread.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Furienna

If we should trust this article, Harry will become Duke of Sussex: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_of_Sussex

The source is 'Daily Mirror'. Not very trustworthy...

However, the Sussex title has been the one that has been speculated about the most, so they have quite a chance of being right