Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children

[Iluvbertie]

The issue of gender blind inheritance of titles has been raised in the parliament a number of times and that is where it will end up being changed - by law - to allow for the first born child to inherit regardless of a younger son and regardless of gender.

Why should Andrew's title not be allowed to be passed to his children while Edward's can be simply because Edward had a son and Andrew didn't - plainly that is sexist and in this day and age that is totally unacceptable.

I doubt that the Edinburgh title would have a different remainder to the Wessex title as that would mean Louise getting Edinburgh while James would still inherit Wessex and thus separate the titles which I don't think is what anyone would want - both of Edward's children to be peers of the realm while neither of Andrew's are able to have that status.

 

[Skippyboo]

And if Parliament ever passes the law changing it then the Royal Family will follow it but they aren't going to lead the charge. The Queen didn't create any royal peerage with both genders can inherit. Even the Mountbatten peerage only allows for the daughters of Louis to inherit then it goes back to males. There is male bias that sons of the monarch pass down their HRH to their children but daughters don't, the Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall titles are limited to men, wives of Princes become Princess but not husbands of Princesses unless she is a direct heir. There are all kinds of inequality. Monarchy itself is based on inequality.

 

[Iluvbertie]

All the children of the monarch are HRH not just the sons. It is only the children of the sons who can pass on HRH so male-line grandchildren but not female line grandchildren.

Personally I would limit HRH to the eldest child of the monarch and their eldest child and no spouses at all with only the HRHs undertaking royal duties. I wouldn't allow great-grandchildren to have HRHs at all so in my system only Charles and William would be HRH while the rest would be plain Mr or Miss/Ms/Mrs with the clear expectation that they would not attend any royal events at all other than weddings and commemorative church services.

 

[Rudolph]

Well, I've always been of the opinion that Harry's children won't be HRH either by choice or just a limiting of the style.

Edward set the precedent and really it makes no sense for people who will never be near the throne to have it.

Harry and his wife will be HRH but his children will be styled as the children of a duke.

 

[Pranter]

I've wondered about how Harry will handle his children when it comes to titles. I haven't decided what I think. It wouldn't surprise me if he didn't want them as a way to give them some protection ... but I think regardless if his children have titles are not they are going to be of interest to the media/public.

Then he might want them to have them, he's going to be a senior royal all his life. He and William are close and we have every expectation of them having a long working life together with their families. So wouldn't surprise me either if his children are given titles, even HRH titles.

Will be interesting to see what actually happens should he have children.

LaRae

 

[Pranter]

Rudolph...Edward set the precedent? Ann set the precedent didn't she? Her children were the first to not have titles....or are you talking about something else?


LaRae

 

[Rudolph]

Rudolph...Edward set the precedent? Ann set the precedent didn't she? Her children were the first to not have titles....or are you talking about something else?


LaRae

Anne's children were never going to be HRH, it's passed through the male-line. Edward had a choice to make. In consultation with BP, it was decided his children would not have a royal style.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Rudolph...Edward set the precedent? Ann set the precedent didn't she? Her children were the first to not have titles....or are you talking about something else?


LaRae

Anne had to ask for her children to have titles either by having her husband given one or for the children to be given them in their own right.

Edward had to do the opposite - ask for his children NOT to be HRHs.

Under the 1917 LPs HRH goes automatically to:

the children of the monarch - Charles, Anne, Andrew and Edward

the wives of the sons of the monarch - Diana, Camilla, Sarah and Sophie (although on divorce they automatically lose it now)

the male line grandchildren of the monarch - William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, Richard, Edward, Alexandra and Michael (Louise and James don't have this as per their father's request)

the wives of the male line grandsons - Kate, Birgitte, Katherine and Marie-Christine

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


In addition to those LPs new ones were needed in 1948 to ensure that the children of the then Princess Elizabeth were born HRH - Charles and Anne - rather than having to wait until they were the children of the monarch. Had those LPs not been issued then Charles would have been born as Lord Charles Mountbatten, Earl of Merioneth (from his father's titles) and Anne as Lady Anne Mountbatten.

Further LPs were issued to give HRH to all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales when Kate was pregnant with George so that a daughter would be born HRH - as befits a potential future monarch. As George was a boy he was covered under the 1917 LPs but these new LPs meant Charlotte was born a Princess and not a Lady Charlotte Mountbatten-Windsor.

If Harry has children in the present reign new LPs will need to be issued to give them HRH from birth as they don't qualify under the 1917 LPs so currently they would be:

eldest son (assuming Harry has a title) would use the second title as a courtesy title like James now uses Viscount Severn
younger sons - Lord xxxx Mountbatten-Windsor
daughters - Lady yyyy Mountbatten-Windsor

As the Queen didn't amend the 1917 LPs in 2012 to extend to all grandchildren of the current Prince of Wales I suspect that she may not issue such LPs for Harry's children and so they won't be HRHs from birth.

 

[VictoriaB]

As the Queen didn't amend the 1917 LPs in 2012 to extend to all grandchildren of the current Prince of Wales I suspect that she may not issue such LPs for Harry's children and so they won't be HRHs from birth.

But Harry's children will become HRH when Charles becomes King. Is that correct? So under the present system, we would still have people who have only a very, very remote chance of inheriting the throne entitled to the HRH.

Personally, I like your suggestion - the heir, the heir's heir and that's it. But, if that were the case, would the marriages not be morganatic marriages which, according the advice from 1936, does not exist in Britain?

 

[Iluvbertie]

The marriages wouldn't be morganatic as I would be changing the law as to who is HRH not denying it for petty purposes but actually changing the status of the spouse to keep their own birth status.

 

[Pranter]

Ah ok gotcha!

So as Victoria has asked/said....Harry's children would become HRH after Charles is King right? Unless they are styled that with a new LP prior to that event.


LaRae

 

[Iluvbertie]

Yes - under the 1917 LPs Harry's children will become HRH's when Charles becomes King if the Queen hasn't issued such LPs beforehand.

 

[Pranter]

Great, thanks Bertie!


LaRae

 

[MaiaMia_53]

I would tend to agree that Harry probably does not want any children born to him to be designated HRH. He will likely be styled Duke of Sussex upon marrying, and his eventual children will be styled as befits the children of a Duke.

I found this interesting article from 2008, which is of course dated since it was written prior to William's wedding. It was unknown in 2008 that William would eventually be styled Duke of Cambridge & Earl of Strathearn.

It's still a good read, nonetheless:
A Dukedom for Harry? | Unofficial Royalty

I agree that Henry, Duke of Clarence has a nice ring to it. But yes, the less than memorable associations with the former ne'er-do-well, Prince Albert, Duke of Clarence circa early 20th-century, means reactivation of that title anytime soon is hardly likely.

The facts surrounding the in abeyance title, Duke of Albany, are fascinating. As is the information on the Duke of Cumberland title, which also is not available.

I also agree with the writer that the 'Windsor' title has a nice ring and is very family name appropriate, but is definitely out of the question since 'Duke & Duchess of Windsor' is still too closely (and maybe for all time) associated with the abdication of former King Edward VIII and his marriage to American divorcee, Wallis Simpson.

That leaves Sussex for consideration, and I believe Harry has previously mentioned he prefers that title. The article also discusses some other extinct peerages 'loosely associated with royal history': Portsmouth, Cleveland, Inverness, and Strathearn. However, Prince William is already the Earl of Strathearn, so that one is out. In addition, Prince Andrew, Duke of York is also the Earl of Inverness, so that one is out too. Cleveland and Portsmouth don't have much of an historic ring, although they are nice names. Harry will likely become the Duke of Sussex.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The last Duke of Clarence died in the 19th Century not the early 20th century.

Prince Albert Victor was the heir apparent to the then Prince of Wales and had recently announced his engagement to Princess Mary of Teck when he died. She then went on to marry his younger brother, Prince George who was created Duke of York and eventually Prince of Wales and King George V.

 

[Skippyboo]

People seem to always mess up the century thing. It's one ahead of the date. 17th Century is 1600s, 20th Century is 1900s, the current century is the 21st .

What's funny is that Albert Victor dies in 1892. So he wasn't a former ne'er-do-well in any early century. He is dead before the 1900s and wasn't born yet in the early 1800s.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

The last Duke of Clarence died in the 19th Century not the early 20th century.

Prince Albert Victor was the heir apparent to the then Prince of Wales and had recently announced his engagement to Princess Mary of Teck when he died. She then went on to marry his younger brother, Prince George who was created Duke of York and eventually Prince of Wales and King George V.

Thanks for the correction. Yes, I knew that Prince Albert Victor had been originally engaged to Mary of Teck before he died. His brother, Prince George later took over as heir to King Edward, and he also inherited his older brother's fiancee.

I have previously read books on Queen Victoria, her children and her grandchildren, but I didn't remember the exact date of death of the Prince of Wales' oldest son. So, Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence died in 1892. I didn't realize he died before the 20th century dawned. I knew he died fairly young, but I thought he had lived into the early 1900s. So, his grandmother, Queen Victoria made it into the 20th century, but he didn't.

There is speculation that Albert Victor was mentally backward and that he may have died of gonorrhea or syphilis, although the official story is that he died from an influenza outbreak. He was also rumored by some to have been Jack the Ripper, but there is no definitive evidence to support that speculation. It was theorized in a novel (later a 2001 movie) that Prince Albert Victor became involved with a woman of ill repute and fathered a child by her, and also secretly married her. And then to cover up his transgressions, an elaborate plan was devised by certain powers to murder various prostitutes (including Albert Victor's paramour). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_Hell_(film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Albert_Victor,_Duke_of_Clarence_and_Avondale

Jack The Ripper suspect Prince Albert Victor is revealed to have had gonorrhoea | Daily Mail Online

I suppose it can be said that Mary of Teck was lucky to escape being saddled with Prince Albert Victor (England was lucky too).

 

[Westfield Bakery]

Here's the deal. When Prince Harry of Wales gets married, I wonder if he will receive a wedding gift of a royal peerage or some sort.

Possible Dukedoms:
The Dukedom of Sussex
The Dukedom of Albany
The Dukedom of Clarence

I could see the prince just continuing to be Prince Henry of Wales, and his wife being Princess Henry of Wales, but as the son and brother of the Heirs Apparent, his children should be styled as His/Her Royal Highness Prince/Princess____.

 

[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.

 

[Mbruno]

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.

I am not sure this so-called "animosity" towards Beatrice and Eugenie is related to their being HRHs or not. I think it has more to do with animosity towards Beatrice's and Eugenie's parents and the girls' perceived lifestyle.

Children of the king's second son have always been HRHs. Even though Harry may ask Charles to give his children only the style of a duke's children, it would be a big departure from tradition.

 

[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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.