Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children

[wbenson]

It is customary that a son like Harry that is third in line for the throne (as Prince Andrew was at one time) to be given a Royal Dukedom. My guess is that Prince Harry will become Duke Of Lancaster - which is the only royal dukedom that is available at present.

That would call into question the ability of the monarch to use the funds from the Duchy of Lancaster. Those funds make up quite a large chunk of the monarch's private income.

There is also no such thing as a "Royal Dukedom." There are dukedoms that are customarily originally granted to royals, but they need not stay that way, and completely new ones (using either new titles or old ones that weren't royal) can be created. The Dukedoms of Clarence, Cambridge, Connaught and Strathearn, and Cumberland are currently extinct, as well.

I am guessing that the Queen can transfer any title she wants, and will, with Prince Charles approval, probably transfer the title Duke of Rothsay onto William until he fully becomes Prince Of Wales.

She can't transfer any titles at all; she can only create new ones. Transferring it would require an Act of Parliament, as it would change the lawful succession of the Dukedom. The Act of the Scottish Parliament creating it provides that the title shall be held by "the first-born Prince of the King of Scots for ever."

 

[Polly]

It is customary that a son like Harry that is third in line for the throne (as Prince Andrew was at one time) to be given a Royal Dukedom. My guess is that Prince Harry will become Duke Of Lancaster - which is the only royal dukedom that is available at present.

I think that you will find that the current Duke of Lancaster is Queen Elizabeth,herself.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There are a number of traditional Dukedoms available such as Cambridge, which was rumoured to be for Edward before his marriage, Clarence, Avondale etc

Wessex is a created title previously used prior to 1066 so it is possible to create a dukedom without a lot of previous history.

The title Duke of Lancaster can't be given to Harry as it is currently held by the Queen, according to the fact that when dealing with the Duchy she is referred to by that title.

Charles is the Duke of Rothsay and that title will pass to William on the death of the present Queen, when William will also become Duke of Cornwall. Sometime after that Charles may decide to create William Prince of Wales but that is not an automatic title.

The women these princes marry will take the female form of their husband's titles and nothing else.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

The Prince of Wales holds the following titles: Prince Of Wales, Duke Of Cornwall, Duke Of Rothsay, Count Of Chester, Count of Carick, Baron Of Renfrew, Great Steward Of Scotland, Lord Of the Isles

My guess is that Charles will name William Duke of Rothsay.

No, he can't do that. Rothesay is the Dukedom that goes to the Scottish heir apparent, the equivalent of Cornwall title. Only the Heir Apparent can be Duke of Rothesay. Just like only heir apparent can be Duke of Cornwall in England.

 

[iowabelle]

This is true, but if one of them were attracted to a Roman Catholic girl, she can convert into whatever religion, so they can stay in the line of succession.

From my studies I think the intent of the law was that "once a Catholic, always a Catholic" even if the Catholic spouse converts. What if someone like April agreed to convert for her husband -- and then secretly remained a Catholic (and influenced their children that way)?

I know it's not likely to matter as far as Peter and his children go, they're not likely to inherit the throne... but this all goes back to Charles I, Charles II and James II.

 

[Picmajik]

would William need a new title?

Wonder how far off an engagement is? on do you think he will be created a Duke or What -Not????

Once Charles becomes king wouldn't he have the option to name William the next Prince of Wales? As heir-apparent William would be the next in line for that title if the king decides to name a POW but I understand Charles wouldn't be obligated to transfer any of his titles would he? It is my understanding that Charles's titles would revert back to the crown and could be given out at the monarch's discretion. Also, as there is no male heir for the current Duke of York wouldn't that title go back to the crown after Andrew's passing?

 

[selrahc4]

Once Charles becomes king wouldn't he have the option to name William the next Prince of Wales? As heir-apparent William would be the next in line for that title if the king decides to name a POW but I understand Charles wouldn't be obligated to transfer any of his titles would he? It is my understanding that Charles's titles would revert back to the crown and could be given out at the monarch's discretion. Also, as there is no male heir for the current Duke of York wouldn't that title go back to the crown after Andrew's passing?

When Charles becomes King, William will automatically become Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick and Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles, and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland, just as Charles automatically assumed those titles when his mother became Queen.

At some time after that Charles could, if he chose, creat William Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester.

 

[Picmajik]

how to raise the kids

i always found it interesting how do people (in a marriage of different religions) decide which religion will be the dominate one in the household or how do you blend them so the children are not conflicted or confused by opposing doctrine.

Some faiths have guidelines on that already. If someone marries a Catholic it used to be with the agreement that the children would be raised Catholic but some families have opted not to follow that rule. The church used to be more forceful on that but today's society doesn't always feel as bound to follow "the rules" as it used to be even just 20-30 years ago. In Judaism the mother's faith is usually the guideline, if your mother is Jewish you are considered Jewish in the eyes of the faith. Other faiths will have different guidelines but in any mixed-faith marriage it should be a topic settled prior to marriage or there will be problems later if church is important to either parent. I have friends who have opted to raise kids in both faiths then let the children decide which faith to accept full time when they are older. I also have seen people who decided no religion was the answer.

Younger readers may be confused by all of this emphasis on religion and faith as church ties do not seem as important as they used to be but for some readers they are stronger and important as ever. In my case I would consider marrying someone not from my faith but for some others it would be difficult. One joke in my family is that a marriage between a Baptist and a Methodist is a "mixed marriage" (at the time most family members were either Baptist or Methodist) but it wouldn't be a problem as they are still Christian and protestant. In some families marrying someone who isn't protestant was out of the question, marrying someone other than Christian was WAY out of the question.

I'm glad I do not have this problem.

 

[wbenson]

Prince William will not be created a Duke, as Royal Dukedoms only go to Princes who are members of the royal family that will not inherit the throne. Prince Andrew is Duke of York, Prince Edward will be Duke of Edinburgh when his father dies.

That's not true. Prince Albert Victor (Edward VII's first son) was created Duke of Clarence and Avondale, even though it was fully expected that he would become King. He died before that could happen, though.

 

[Warren]

Since we were on such a roll discussing the character of the Duke of Clarence, I have created a new thread in the British Royal History subforum, Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence (1864-1892) and moved the posts there.

The Duke of Clarence was an "interesting" character, so please don't let this relocation interrupt the ongoing discussion of 'Prince Eddy collar and cuffs', the man who would be King, and almost became Queen Mary's husband.

 

[bad_barbarella]

Will Harry's wife be a princess or a duchess?
Will William be king by himself.... and his wife stay a princess... because his grandfather is a prince not the king... sorry im just confused why people say things like "who is the future queen?" Wouldn't his wife remain a princess..

 

[Isana]

I think she'll be HRH (name) Princess Harry of Wales until Harry gets his own title. If he becomes Duke of such-and-such, she'll of course be a Duchess. The same applies to William.

The wife of a King becomes a Queen but the husband of a Reigning Queen (like Elizabeth II) isn't called King but Prince Consort (or gets another title). I guess this goes back to the old idea that the man would outrank the woman. Hence if the husband of the Queen was the King, he'd be in charge and considered "higher" in the hierarchy. So to ensure that everyone knows that the woman is the actual head of state, her husband is "merely" a Prince .

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Well, I'm not really sure, now that you raise it. I'm used to reading Down Here of Charles being Heir Presumptive and William, Heir Apparent, i.e. we presume that Charles is next in line and apparently, William will succeed him.

An Heir Presumptive is an heir where it can be presumed at that moment that he will inherit but where there is the possibility that this situation changes. Death of the Heir is not considered in this scenario.

Eg. princess Elizabeth was her father's Heiress Presumptive, because she was the eldest child, when the king had only daughters. But if queen Elizabteh, her mother, had given king George VI. another child, a son, this son would immediately have become Heir Apparent, because whatever happened (except his death) there couldn't have been another heir with senior rights, as the rule is: older son senior to younger son, sons senior to daughters.

Charles is the eldest child and the son of the queen, so whatever happens (except his death), he is the heir, nothing can deprive him of his birthright. Thus he is Heir Apparent. His son William as eldest child and son is Charles' Heir Apparent, because nothing Charles or anyone else can do can change his senior position in the line. As Charles will be king if he outlives his mother and William is his heir, William is an heir apparent to the Crown, but not "The Heir Apparent", as there can be only one and that's his father, Charles, as Charles' claim is senior to that of William.

Now if William married and has as first child a daughter, she under current law would be William's Heiress Presumptive as the birth of a brother would replace her as heiress to the throne. probably they'd change the law to the firstborn-prerogative like in the Netherlands and Sweden, but so far, boys have senior rights to girls when they are siblings.

Hope this helps.

 

[msleiman]

would William children be HRH even if the Queen is still on the throne? What about Harry's children being HRH?

 

[Jo of Palatine]

would William children be HRH even if the Queen is still on the throne? What about Harry's children being HRH?

At the moment only William's eldest son would be HRH because he would be William's heir apparent, so he is going to be king one day. The others would be Lord/Lady Mountbatten-Windsor. Same with Harry's children, they would be Lord/Lady. As soon as Charles accedes, his grandchildren have a right to HRH and prince/princess. But as we've seen with the children of the then princess Elizabeth, who were created prince/princess even though their mother was just heiress presumptive, I guess HM would change the rules to suit her great-grandchildren of the Royal line.

 

[christinacg]

^but if Willam has children after HM has passed, would they all be HRH? That suprises me that only the elsest child of a future king would be HRH. Even with Harry I would expect his kids to have the title HRH.

 

[ayvee]

^but if Willam has children after HM has passed, would they all be HRH? That suprises me that only the elsest child of a future king would be HRH. Even with Harry I would expect his kids to have the title HRH.

The British Monarchy limits HRH to grandchildren of the monarch. So if Harry had kids and QEII is the monarch, then his children would simply be Lord and Lady. The Lord and Lady title would change to HRH when Charles becomes the monarch. This rule limits the number of HRH's around in the BRF.

I guess, different countries have different rules. In Denmark, the sons of the monarch are HRH. The children of the Crown Prince are also HRH but the children of (the second son) Prince Joachim are only HH.

Not sure what the rule is for non-reigning monarchs though and how far HRH passes down to the kids.

-Ayvee

 

[Jo of Palatine]

That suprises me that only the elsest child of a future king would be HRH.

It's not even the eldest child of William but his eldest son. Because only this child will be for sure (if he lives to see that day) one king. So it's only the most direct line which has a right to the HRH and prince once the relationsship to the souverain is wider than two generations.

So if Charles dies before his mother, then William is the next king and Harry has never been the son of the king, only the grandson of the queen. In this case his children, even though they are nephew and niece of king William, will only be Lord/Lady (first name) Mountbatten-Windsor, according to the current rules. Once Charles becomes king, his grandchildren by Harry are HRH and prince/princess.

The weirdest thing in UK law is that an unborn child has no inheritance rights. Let's assume the queen dies and Charles becomes king before William is married. William marries a young lady who gets pregnant. During this pregancy Charles dies and William has an accident. The Crown would bypass the unborn child of William and Harry as the next in line would immediately become king. It has been discussed in a similar case on queen Victoria's ascension. Question was what would happen if queen Adelaide, wife of Victoria's predecessor William IV., was pregnant when the king died. The solution for Victoria was that she would become queen immediately on the king's death but that she would abdicate in favour of her cousin with a more senior right as soon as the baby was born. But that was Victoria's decision, according to the law she couldn't be forced to abdicate once she was queen. Fortunately queen Adelaide was not pregnant when her husband died, but there have been such cases in history. In Germanic and french law the unborn child has a claim to the throne, while in British law it hasn't.

 

[msleiman]

It's not even the eldest child of William but his eldest son. Because only this child will be for sure (if he lives to see that day) one king. So it's only the most direct line which has a right to the HRH and prince once the relationsship to the souverain is wider than two generations.

The weirdest thing in UK law is that an unborn child has no inheritance rights. Let's assume the queen dies and Charles becomes king before William is married. William marries a young lady who gets pregnant. During this pregancy Charles dies and William has an accident. The Crown would bypass the unborn child of William and Harry as the next in line would immediately become king.

Do you think that this law will be changed! I understand this law in the past, but now even if the baby was born very early it chance of living is very high. I think that this should be changed.

 

[Skydragon]

Do you think that this law will be changed! I understand this law in the past, but now even if the baby was born very early it chance of living is very high. I think that this should be changed.

Apart from anything else, it ensures that there is always a monarch. Anything can happen to an unborn child.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Apart from anything else, it ensures that there is always a monarch. Anything can happen to an unborn child.

That's the idea behind it: in British law, the Common law on which the british sytsem is based, the king never dies. Meaning that the moment a souverain dies, his heir becomes the next souverain. Interregnum is a foreign concept in Common law when it comes to the kingship.

 

[muriel]

Current practice notwithstanding, I think it makes sense only for Will's children to have the HRH, whilst Harry's children to simply be Lord / Lady M-B. That said, on my opinion, Harry's wife shoud have the HRH, as the wife of an HRH, and the daughter-in-law of a future King.

 

[PrinceOfCanada]

Of course Harry's wife would take HRH. That's never been in question--wives take the style of their husband.

 

[Furienna]

Harry's children would still be princes and princesses though, right?

 

[PrinceOfCanada]

They would be when Charles ascends the throne. If Harry were to have children right now, they would be great-grandchildren of the monarch, and not entitled to HRH under the Letters Patent currently in effect.

On Charles' presumed accession, Harry's putative children would then be grandchildren of the monarch, and entitled to the style of HRH as Princes or Princesses of the United Kingdom.

'course, that could all be changed if another Letter Patent is issued. More likely, Harry will be created a Royal Duke of something or other (Cumberland, maybe. Sandringham would be quite nice, actually--create a totally new title), probably with a couple of subsidiary titles (Duke Whatsit, Earl of Over There, and Baron That Other Place). His children would then be entitled to use the appropriate courtesy titles.

Given HM's probable longevity, it's almost certain that Harry will have a couple of sprogs before she dies, and thus his children will have courtesy titles first, then rise to HRH when Charles accedes. At that point, they'd be known as something like Princess Buttercup, Lady Sandringham (or whatever).

Beatrice and Eugenie, however, won't ever have children with the HRH style.

 

[sophie]

If they do get married will she be just HRH Princess Catherine?

 

[PrincessofEurope]

If they do get married will she be just HRH Princess Catherine?

No
i would image she would techinally be HRH Princess William of Wales unless the Queen (or if it was King Charles by then) granted William a title such as a Duke of .... or Earl of .....
William could receive one of his father's titles but as Camilla is using the Duchess of Cornwall title that one is out so most likely he will get a new title like the precedent that was set for Edward and Andrew when they married

of course the press and public will all call her Princess Kate

 

[Skydragon]

No
i would image she would techinally be HRH Princess William of Wales unless the Queen (or if it was King Charles by then) granted William a title such as a Duke of .... or Earl of .....
William could receive one of his father's titles but as Camilla is using the Duchess of Cornwall title that one is out so most likely he will get a new title like the precedent that was set for Edward and Andrew when they married

of course the press and public will all call her Princess Kate

She can't be the Duchess of Cornwall until Charles ascends the throne and William becomes the Duke of Cornwall. The title Duke of Cornwall is reserved for the eldest son of the sovereign.

 

[magnik]

But after Charles become a king doesn't William become Prince of Wales?
If I were her it would be better to be know as the princess of Wales than the Duchess of Cornwall...

 

[Warren]

But after Charles become a king doesn't William become Prince of Wales?

It's likely but not automatic. If and when Charles becomes King he will decide if and when William is made Prince of Wales.
This and other questions have been answered many times in this thread.