The eldest son and heir of an earl or viscount is given one of his father's lesser titles as a courtesy, if one exists; his younger sons are given the title The Honourable. Daughters of earls are given the title Lady, while daughters of viscounts and all the children of barons are given the title The Honourable.
I Wish the Queens Husband wouldve been made Prince Consort
You have to convince him of that as it has been reported a number of times that it is Philip that has refused that title each time the Queen has offered it - 1952 being the first and 2007 the most recent time that it was reported that she had offered to do so and he had refused that title.
What is the difference between his being Prince Consort and the title he has now? Was it Prince Albert who was Prince Consort -- how did that make a difference? (Not arguing, I'm asking for information.)
Was there a time when only the eldest daughter of an earl was given the title Lady, and younger daughters were The Honourable? I read that in a period novel set 200 years ago, that one of the characters was the daughter of an earl but called The Honourable First Name, etc., but her eldest sister was Lady First Name. Or perhaps that was an error by the author?
I don't think this will happen.
I can see Beatrice becoming HRH Princess Beatrice of York, Mrs. David Clark....similiar to her aunt's title during her first marriage. The only way she will become a Duchess, Lady or whatever is if she marries someone who currently holds a title.
I can't see the Queen, or Charles or William giving any husband of Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie or Louise an additional title.
Exactly - she took all his titles.Thanks for the clarification! I knew Princess of Wales was her most senior title, and she held the other titles that Prince Charles holds. I just guessed since she has several titles by virtue of marriage, she would not hold "The Princess Charles" as a title, as that would be the title she would receive upon marriage had Charles had no other titles (ie. Princess Michael). But that make total sense, as he is "The Prince Charles", so she, as well as being The Princess of Wales, was also The Princess Charles!!.
But starting with my latest confusion first: I thought a Princess became Princess [His Name] only when he had no other titles to bestow. So Princess Michael uses that form, but it is inappropriate for Princess Camilla or Princess Sophie.
Next, it seems that the Sovereign can rearrange several aspects of styles and titles, such as renaming Houses or bestowing titles such as Prince and styles such as HRH. Is this correct?
Finally, while it has been generally the case in the past that dead people's titles can't change, aren't a lot of things in flux in the last 100 years in various monarchies? If a Sovereign were to posthumously bestow a title, what would stop him from so doing? Unless the Prime Minister were to advise otherwise, can't the Sovereign do as he wishes with titles and styles?
Is the BRF the only one with this kind of royal styling? Example: Mette-Marit wasn't born a Princes but she isn't called Princess Haakon, she is styled Crown Princess Mette-Marit, why is the that? Why is the BRF different?
No, there are examples from various places: Princess Georg of Hanover, Princess Charles of Belgium, Princess Alexandre of Belgium, Princess Louis Napoléon, Princess Aage of Denmark, Princess Viggo of Denmark, Princess Michel of France, Crown Princess Pavlos of Greece, Princess Karl of Hesse, Princess Charles-Louis d'Arenberg, Princess Heinrich (Henry) of Prussia, Princess Friedrich Karl of Prussia, Princess Henry of Battenberg, Princess Christian of Schleswig-Holstein, Grand Duchess Serge of Russia, etc etc.Is the BRF the only one with this kind of royal styling? Example: Mette-Marit wasn't born a Princes but she isn't called Princess Haakon, she is styled Crown Princess Mette-Marit, why is the that? Why is the BRF different?
Now another question has arisen. Since Queen Elizabeth II is attempting to "downsize" the monarchy (at least in terms of the civil list), is being on the civil list the Queen's choice? New titles granted not on the civil list would seem to be purely honorific (does she do that much?)
And I'm feeling sad for the children of Princess Anne. What titles would they have been entitled to?
Would the Queen have given the titles (where does she get them - are there unused titles lying around or does she invent them?) There's virtually nothing on wikipedia about Anne's relationship with her children (unlike the other royals of her generation, who have more robust biographies).
Are there any European nations who have allowed titles to pass on the female line? (I know that's a real newbie question, I'll keep reading threads to see if I can find the answer).
This is the general rule; but it's possible a special reminder contained in the Letters Patent, which allowes women to succeed and transmit the title to their descendants in case of lack of male heirs; i.e. the titles of Earl Mountbatten of Burma, Duke of Marlborough, Baron Ravensdale.A girl can't pass on titles unless she is the monarch - only a boy can.
Royal duke's don't give up their princely titles, however a dukedom is such a valuable sustantive title that monarchs bestow them on their own children (sons) usually at the time of their marriage. A royal duke would be styled HRH The Duke of York. He is understood to be a prince of the realm since he (or his wife by courtesy) is styled royal highness. A non-royal duke would be His Grace The Duke of Wellington.ok, so now i think my question has changed. why do they use their duke and duchess or count and countess titles over their prince and princess ones?
Albert was created Prince Consort mainly to give him greater precedence at foreign state functions. Even though he was married to the reigning British monarch, there were others that outranked him in their own right. This was done as a personal honor to Albert but to also correct that embarrassing and awkward situation abroad.What is the difference between his being Prince Consort and the title he has now? Was it Prince Albert who was Prince Consort -- how did that make a difference? (Not arguing, I'm asking for information.)
This is the general rule; but it's possible a special reminder contained in the Letters Patent, which allowes women to succeed and transmit the title to their descendants in case of lack of male heirs; i.e. the titles of Earl Mountbatten of Burma, Duke of Marlborough, Baron Ravensdale.
Harry's title, like Beatrice and Eugenie's, come from the fact that they are male line grandchildren of a monarch, as such the title can be given to a spouse (only in Harry's case) but not the children.