Missyjojo88
Gentry
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2004
- Messages
- 67
Would someone like Lady Helen Windsor be considered a commoner? What exactly is the benefit of being a Lady and a Lord?
Thanks for your wonderful explanation and clarity. It cleared up a lot of confusion.wbenson said:Sorry, I wasn't very clear... He is able to use the title of "Viscount Linley"...
Empress Friedrich was more a nick than Victorias official name. She was always Her Majesty, the Empress, later she was informally styled as Her Majesty The Dowager Empress or Her Majesty The Empress Mother or The Empress Friedrich but her official title was still The Empress, so the Friedrich part was added to end confusion.Henri M. said:But we have seen more of these examples (The Empress Friedrich, Princess Andrew of Greece, Princess Michael of Kent)
I recall also that after her death, The Queen issued something like a statement saying that Diana could be referred to as 'the' Princess of Wales (not sure if it was only lower-case 't' or not) until, of course, Prince Charles remarried.So I suppose from 1997 through 2005, you could write her name as Diana, the Princess of Wales instead of just Diana, Princess of Wales.branchg said:This is true as Diana was never granted the right to assume the dignity by the Queen via letters patent. However, the Palace confirmed after the divorce that it was acceptable to refer to Diana as "Princess Diana", although technically she was no longer a princess, as she was the mother of a future king.
Suonymona said:the title actually goes to Charles as the oldest male descendant but there is an "understanding" he will not actually accept it
CasiraghiTrio said:in discussing the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester, those dukedoms would revert back to the Crown after the deaths of the current dukes.
CasiraghiTrio said:In order for the dukedoms to lose the royal status, there must be a reverting back and reissue because otherwise the loss of the royal honorifics would not make sense.
Henri M. said:No, after the death of HRH Prince Edward of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the 2nd Duke of Kent, his son Lord George Windsor, the Earl of St. Andrews will become the 3rd Duke of Kent.
And after the death of HRH Prince Richard of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the 2nd Duke of Gloucester, his son Lord Alexander Windsor, the Earl of Ulster, will become the 3rd Duke of Gloucester.
But as both the Earl of St. Andrews and the Earl of Ulster are no sons or grandsons of a Sovereign, their Dukedom will cease to be a royal dukedom.
Their style will change from a royal dukedom into a normal dukedom with the style 'His Grace the Duke of Kent' / 'His Grace the Duke of Gloucester'.
Their precedence follows their place in the line of succession to the throne as descendants of George V, assuming they remain in union with The Church of England.Henri M. said:Well, in fact nothing regarding their peerages is reverted. But the 3rd Duke of Gloucester and the 3rd Duke of Kent will make an enormous downfall in terms of hierarchy.
branchg said:Their precedence follows their place in the line of succession to the throne as descendants of George V, assuming they remain in union with The Church of England.
Found this at wiki:branchg said:Upon the deaths of Princes Edward and Richard, their dukedoms pass automatically to their surviving male issue, but they lose the qualification of Royal Highness under the 1917 Letters Patent of George V as great-grandsons in the male line of The Sovereign.
However, the dukedoms are considered royal since Kent and Gloucester are only granted to sons and grandsons of a Sovereign. Once there is no longer a male heir, they revert back to the Crown and are available again to be re-created for another member of the royal family in the future.
ysbel said:Henri, why does your list have some peers listed twice?
For example, the Duke of Sutherland and the Duke of Westminster? One person cannot occupy two different positions in the rank of precedence.
Posted by Suonymona
the title actually goes to Charles as the oldest male descendant but there is an "understanding" he will not actually accept it
Henri M. said:This is not possible. [/quote]
Henri, if you are going to quote me, use the ENTIRE sentence. See this link for my original post.
The bolding is for this post. I did not say it was fact. I was very deliberate in my wording because I did not know for certain. I have not probed so deep into hypothetical situations regarding titles of the British Royal Family until this last week.Suonymona said:If the Queen is still living when Philip dies, my understanding is that the title actually goes to Charles as the oldest male descendant but there is an "understanding" he will not actually accept it and it will be reverted to the crown Charles will assume.
As a member of this board, I expect that if people are going to "call me out" about my words, that they use ALL of my words, not just select what they deem appropriate to point out my error.
I have been wrong before--on this board, in various forums regarding different families. I admit when I am wrong, especially when presented with correct, factual information. But for someone to pick and choose from my words in order to make me look silly is rude. NO ONE should be subjected to this tactic on any messageboard.
I was incorrect in my information. But I did not present my "understanding" as fact. Snipping my words to make it appear so is wrong. I admit my error. I expect as much from you Henri M.!
Henri M. said:Are we talking about the same precedence in society?
You mean that Zara Phillips or Arthur Chatto, or James Ogilvy, or Zenouska Mowatt do outrank someone like The Most Noble Edward Fitzalan-Howard, Duke of Norfolk, Premier Duke and Premier Earl of England, the Earl Marshal?
branchg said:No, of course not! A commoner does not outrank a peer. I'm just pointing out in terms of official precedence, regardless of title or style, the members of the royal family in line to the succession always outrank peers.
Henri M. said:The Duke of Sutherland is Lord Francis Egerton.
The Duke of Westminster is Lord Gerald Grosvenor.
So they are different persons.
But I see I have mistyped the Duke of Westminster twice on 23 and 26.
My excuses, there is only one Duke of Westminster, of course.
James Hamilton, His Grace the (5th) Duke of Abercorn and (7th) Duke of Sutherland
Francis Egerton, His Grace the (7th) Duke of Sutherland
ysbel said:How can both James Hamilton and Francis Egerton both be the 7th Duke of Sutherland?
Beck said:Officially Sophie can be known as HRH Princess Edward, but her given title is the Countess of Wessex much like Sarah Ferguson was known as the Duchess of York, she was still HRH Princess Andrew.
Edward is known as an Earl simply because Count's do not exist in English Aristocracy. In England it is Earl and Countess, not Count and Countess.