Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Only by those 'in the know' about Royal titles; everyone else will call her Princess Chelsey (or whatever!)

What about Princess Michael? People don't seem to have any issue addressing her as that. Why should it be any different with Harry's wife if he isn't granted a dukedom? (Which I think is highly unlikely)
 
People haven't really been doing that with Kate.

True, but Duchess Kate just doesn't sound right, and as we know the media still call her 'Kate Middleton'. But back to Harry's future title, i'm sure he'll get a dukedom.

What about Princess Michael? People don't seem to have any issue addressing her as that.

that's because most people don't know her real name.

For years, before I really got into it, I thought 'Michael' WAS her real name!
 
"Duke of Windsor" sounds really good, but then again it has a lot of negative history with King Edward VII and Wallis Simpson and then it was made the BRF's family name (or whatever you call it), so I fear it's unlikely that he'll be given that title.

I like the idea of "Duke of Windsor". I take the view that re-creating that Dukedom and replacing the image of the last DoW with Harry would eventually replace the bad vibe that attached to the man who held it once, and replace the negative history with a good history for the name. It's only a negative history as long as there is no new holder of the title to replace it with a his own identity.

In something of the same vein, I notice the advertisement for replicas of "Kate's engagement ring". While what I see is Diana's engagement ring, it is becoming, and, for many, only ever will be, Kate's ring.

It would take some courage on Harry's part, but he is a soldier and I'm sure he would weather the storm without much difficulty at all. And having a beautiful new Duchess of Windsor would certainly help. The old negative associations are only of historical significance for most young people.
 
What other 'open' dukedoms are there besides Windsor?


LaRae
 
Sussex, Suffolk, Southampton, Surrey to name a few.

I think 'The Prince Henry, Duke of Buckingham' has a nice ring to it!
 
Last edited:
He wouldn't officially be The Prince Henry, Duke of Buckingham'. He would be one or the other. Once he is a Duke (or any other title) he won't officially be listed as The Prince Henry.

Officially he would be HRH The Duke of XXXXX. Like William now he would lose his name - William is now officially HRH The Duke of Cambridge.

Charles is the only Prince who sometimes gets to be HRH The Prince Charles but only in Scotland where he is also The Duke of Rothesay.
 
What other 'open' dukedoms are there besides Windsor?
Currently, the following Royal Dukedoms are vacant:

- Clarence
- Sussex
- Windsor
- Albemarle
- Ross
- Kendal
- Hereford
- Connaught
- St Andrews
- Strathearn
- Avondale


Of those, the ones with most chances to be created for Harry (in my opinion) are Sussex and Ross.
 
Why do you think those two have the most chance?


LaRae
 
Why do you think those two have the most chance? LaRae
Because the rest don't.

- Strathearn is one of Prince William's titles (not Ducal - Prince William is Earl of Strathearn).
- Windsor is obviously associated with the Abdication crisis.
- Albemarle was created several times in Jacobite peerage; while it is not recognized in Britain, I image the royals would be keen to avoid any issues.
- Kendal because of unfortunate history; among other things, it's last creation was for the King's mistress.
- Avondale has controversial association; its last holder, Prince Albert Victor, was even rumoured to be Jack the Ripper.
- Clarence has some unfortunate associations as well. Besides, it has only been created in conjecture with another dukedom.
- Connaught is in Ireland, so a Duke of Connaught is highly unlikely to re-appear ever again.
- St Andrews because there already is a St Andrews in the Royal Family - the Earl of St Andrews (the Duke of Kent's son).
- Hereford because it already exists as a Viscountcy in the Peerage of England.
 
Cool thanks for the background info!

What are the particulars with Ross and Sussex...does one have a higher chance than the other?


LaRae
 
Cool thanks for the background info!

What are the particulars with Ross and Sussex...does one have a higher chance than the other?

You are welcome. :)

The Duke of Sussex title has only been created once before, in the Peerage of the United Kingdom.
It's first and only holder was Prince Augustus Frederick, George III's sixth son. The Prince led a relatively scandal-free life (his two marriages, which contravened the Royal Marriages Act, notwithstanding) and appeared to have pretty solid relationship with his father and brothers.
Before the marriages of Prince Edward and Prince William, Sussex was considered a strong contender for their respective Duchies; instead, Edward was created Earl of Wessex, and William - Duke of Cambridge.

The Duke of Ross title has been created twice, both in the peerage of Scotland.
The first creation was for the third son of James III of Scotland and Margaret of Denmark. That Duke of Ross led a pretty blameless life, although he might have indirectly contributed to his elder brother's rebellion against their father (the future James IV was reportedly worried about the preference George III showed towards his younger son).
The second creation was for the youngest and posthumous child of James IV, Alexander Stewart; the boy died just months after his birth. However, since the new King, James V, was an infant at the time of their father's death, Alexander was the Heir Presumptive of his brother during his short life.

The reason I think Ross is actually more likely than Sussex is became of the Scottish independence movement.
Granting Prince Harry a title that's so potently Scottish would be a symbolic gesture.
 
With the logic used re: Ross, why not Connaught as an option?


LaRae
 
Because Ross is in Scotland (part of the United Kingdom), whereas Connaught is in the Republic of Ireland (no longer part of the Kingdom).

I would feel awkward if Harry were created Duke of Yerevan because Armenia is not connected to the UK in any way.
The same applies to Connaught - part of a different country.
 
While reading through this topic on what dukedom may be available, I remembered a fascinating fact that I read here on the forums quite a few years ago. I don't know if it would have anything to do with giving the Dukedom of Ross to Harry or not.

Its always been surmised that Mohamed al Fayed wanted to fit into and socialize in British aristocratic society. In the 70s, he purchased Balnagown Castle which had been the seat of Clan Ross since the time of William Wallace. His interest stemmed from learning that it is a distinct possibility that it was Egyptians that settled Scotland back in ancient times and even had the Ross tartan somewhat modified to show this.

I think though that when Harry is given a dukedom, it'll be primarily an English dukedom with perhaps a Scottish title to follow it as it has traditionally been for members of the BRF.

Alfayed.com - Restoring Balnagown Castle
 
I would prefer Sussex, personally. I just feel that, unless Harry intends to foster some deep links with Scotland in future, it'd be best to give him an English dukedom. Harry's vice-patron of the English Rugby Football Union for example, whom Scotland would consider their deadliest enemy. I think Harry has closer connections with England, as opposed to Princess Anne, whose links with Scotland are sincere and appreciated across the border.
 
I think it will be sussex as well. now that we have that sorted out for him, Harry just needs to find himself a duchess. :flowers:
 
Given that Connaught is not part of the United Kingdom I doubt it will ever be revived as a British peerage. I can see Clarence or Sussex or possibly Ross being used as a future royal dukedom.
You're right about Connuaght, but it's still the name I much prefer ;-). Clarence is also good and has a chance, but I don't think Ross would be renewed, maybe as an earldom, one of the substantive titles, but not the dukedom.

People haven't really been doing that with Kate.
Maybe in Britain... In my country Kate is very often referred to as księżniczka, Princess Kate or Katherine, like a princess in her own right, not księżna (as for a princess by marriage or a female holder of a princedom or a dukedom). And when she is called księżna, it's not the księżna of Cambridge but księżna Kate.

He wouldn't officially be The Prince Henry, Duke of Buckingham'. He would be one or the other. Once he is a Duke (or any other title) he won't officially be listed as The Prince Henry.

Officially he would be HRH The Duke of XXXXX. Like William now he would lose his name - William is now officially HRH The Duke of Cambridge.

Charles is the only Prince who sometimes gets to be HRH The Prince Charles but only in Scotland where he is also The Duke of Rothesay.
What?? It's about how they are commonly reffered to as in the press or the CC. But they don't lose their names (!) and HRH The Duke of York is His Royal Highness The Prince Andrew, etc., etc., Duke of York, etc., etc., and The Duke of Cambridge is His Royal Highness Prince William, etc., etc., Duke of Cambridge, etc., etc. William is not The Prince William because it's reserved for the children of a Sovereign only.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if Prince Harry has ever dated British Black women? And I also wonder how his family would react IF he fell in love with one and wanted to marry her. I picture him with a light skinned woman actually. But I doubt it would be allowed even though there is nothing that prevents from marrying a British black woman if he wanted to.

Can you all image the fall out if he were to fall in love with and marry an American born young woman? WOW!
 
Actually I doubt if marrying an American would be much of an issue at all, as long as she was able to fit into the way of life of the BRF and accept royal duties.
 
I wonder if Prince Harry has ever dated British Black women? And I also wonder how his family would react IF he fell in love with one and wanted to marry her. I picture him with a light skinned woman actually. But I doubt it would be allowed even though there is nothing that prevents from marrying a British black woman if he wanted to.

Can you all image the fall out if he were to fall in love with and marry an American born young woman? WOW!

Why would there be a fall out should Harry date or marry an American? Last time I checked, Britain and the United States were supposed to be allies and friends.
I doubt there would be any issue at all, provided the girl (whatever her background or ancestry) has a controversy-free past.
 
Last edited:
Why is Lady Helen Taylor now referred to as The Lady Helen Taylor? I read it was because her brothers are not in the line of succession, since her elder brother married a Catholic and her younger became a Catholic. What then does "The" signify in her case?
 
I wonder if Prince Harry has ever dated British Black women? And I also wonder how his family would react IF he fell in love with one and wanted to marry her. I picture him with a light skinned woman actually. But I doubt it would be allowed even though there is nothing that prevents from marrying a British black woman if he wanted to.

Can you all image the fall out if he were to fall in love with and marry an American born young woman? WOW!

Sorry, but there would be no fall out if Henry married an american, a black woman an asian woman or anyone else you can think of. Love is love and even the monarchy get that, as long as she's not Catholic.

Why is Lady Helen Taylor now referred to as The Lady Helen Taylor? I read it was because her brothers are not in the line of succession, since her elder brother married a Catholic and her younger became a Catholic. What then does "The" signify in her case?

This isn't the place to discuss the title, but it is most likely because she's still in line.
 
Why is Lady Helen Taylor now referred to as The Lady Helen Taylor? I read it was because her brothers are not in the line of succession, since her elder brother married a Catholic and her younger became a Catholic. What then does "The" signify in her case?

Lady Helen Taylor was always styled as The Lady - first as The Lady Helen Windsor, and now as The Lady Helen Taylor. It has nothing to do with her inclusion in the Line of Succession and just signifies she is a daughter of a Duke.

The daughters of of Dukes, Marquess and Earls are accorded the definite article to signify their position; the style is prefixed to the given and family name of the woman (The Lady Helen Windsor). If the lady marries a commoner, she retains that styling (The Lady Helen Taylor). Thus, Diana was The Lady Diana Spencer before her marriage, the daughter of Prince and Princess Michael of Kent is The Lady Gabriella Windsor, the daughters of the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester are The Lady Rose Gilman and The Lady Davina Lewis, and so on.

The definite article is also used for wives of Peers, although in a slightly different way: it is added to the husband's title (The Lady Smith). A widowed peeress retains the definite article with the addition of Dowager (The Dowager Lady Smith). In case of wives of the younger sons of Dukes and Marquesses (who are by courtesy known as Lords), they are known by their husband's given and family name with The Lady prefixed to it (The Lady John Smith). Those who are entitled to the styling as The Lady include female recipients of the Order of the Garter and Order of the Thistle; in their case, the title is prefixed to their given and family name (The Lady Marion Fraser).

The definite article "The" is to be used in all cases except after a divorce when the woman doesn't hold the courtesy style in her own right. For instance, The Lady John Smith would be known as Anne, Lady Smith after the divorce).


During the Middle Ages, Princesses were rarely actually called Princesses but rather were referred to as The Ladies too; for instance, the daughters of Henry VIII were known as The Lady Mary (future Mary I of England) and The Lady Elizabeth (future Elizabeth I).
 
Last edited:
The royals have married germans, greeks, french, austro-hungarians, danes, a maori etc, etc.

Loyalty to the family and discretion is what is required.
 
Most importantly would be the requirement that the girl in question is able to embrace the concept of monarchy, class structure, the idea of acknowledging some people as better than you are and the requirement of no private life and living in a gold-fish bowl. If women who grew up with that concept as part of their upbringing, like Diana and Sarah, struggled it would be even harder for a woman brought up to believe that all people are equal - when the royal family embodies the very opposite concept.
 
Most importantly would be the requirement that the girl in question is able to embrace the concept of monarchy, class structure, the idea of acknowledging some people as better than you are and the requirement of no private life and living in a gold-fish bowl. If women who grew up with that concept as part of their upbringing, like Diana and Sarah, struggled it would be even harder for a woman brought up to believe that all people are equal - when the royal family embodies the very opposite concept.

I think that royalty is an opposite concept, in the same way that "Presidential" is.

But it doesn't mean that the people who inhabit that royal world think that they are better than anyone else. I think that is a mistake which is frequently made. I dont believe for a moment that HMQ thinks she is better than anyone else - she has been given (by dint of birth) a job to do and she does it to the best of her ability. There may be privileges attached but there are a raft of disadvantages - in particular no privacy.
 
Most importantly would be the requirement that the girl in question is able to embrace the concept of monarchy, class structure, the idea of acknowledging some people as better than you are and the requirement of no private life and living in a gold-fish bowl. If women who grew up with that concept as part of their upbringing, like Diana and Sarah, struggled it would be even harder for a woman brought up to believe that all people are equal - when the royal family embodies the very opposite concept.

Good grief, are there actually people who believe everyone is equal?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom