Questions about British Styles and Titles 1: Ending 2022

[Elspeth]

Slightly northwest of Watchamacallit.

Surprised you even had to ask...

 

[Von Schlesian]

Ohh yes, the Barony of Watchamacallit, stooped so far in history as to not be remembered at all..

 

[Von Schlesian]

That's Charles, not Chuck, please.

If Harry marries and has children while the Queen is still on the throne and if he hasn't been given a dukedom, he and his wife would be Prince and Princess Henry of Wales. His children, as the great-grandchildren of the sovereign, would be Lord xxxx and Lady xxxx Mountbatten-Windsor.

If he marries and gets a dukedom and has children in the Queen's lifetime, he and his wife would be HRH the Duke and Duchess of Thingumabob, his eldest son would carry his subsidiary title but without an HRH so he'd be The Earl of Whatever, and his other children would still be Lord xxxx and Lady xxxx Mountbatten-Windsor.

Once Prince Charles is king, and if Harry hasn't been given a dukedom, he and his wife would be HRH The Prince and Princess Henry (not "of" anything, since King Charles wouldn't have the Wales title). Their children would be HRH Prince xxxx and HRH Princess xxxx.

If he gets a dukedom - say for example Duke of Cambridge (assuming the York title isn't available), he and his wife would be HRH The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. His children would be HRH Prince xxxx of Cambridge and HRH Princess xxxx of Cambridge; the eldest son doesn't use the subsidiary title if he's also an HRH.

At least, I think that's how it works. I'm sure branchg will be able to give you all the details you need.

I only have one minor alteration Elspeth: and it's with regard to a subsidiary title. Only those titles which pass directly to the monarchs' oldest son, (Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay etcetc) are grouped in such a manner. Other Dukedoms do not necessarily carry with them Marquisates, Earldoms, Vicounties and Baronies.

 

[branchg]

Harry will no doubt be created a Duke upon marriage, whether his grandmother or father is the Sovereign at the time, so his eldest son would assume whatever subsidiary earldom is created with his dukedom as a courtesy style.

The Queen will likely issue letters patent stating Harry's children will be HRH and Prince/Princess of the UK since they are the male-line grandchildren of the future King.

 

[branchg]

Okay...now I am confused..

In the case of Prince Harry: say he is married with kids, regardless of whether QEII is Queen or Chuck is King...and say he so far HAS NOT been given a royal dukedom (tradition), his wife will be HRH and his children will be HRH, right?

Sorry....it can be a little muddling because of all the "what ifs".

Thank you all!

If Harry marries and is not granted a dukedom, then his wife is HRH Princess Henry of Wales, if The Queen still reigns. Any children born while The Queen is still on the throne would be The Lord/Lady Mountbatten-Windsor.

If Harry marries after Charles becomes King, then his wife would be HRH The Princess Henry as the wife of a son of the sovereign. Their children would HRH and Prince/Princess of the UK as male-line grandchildren of the King.

Harry is likely to marry while The Queen is still alive (assuming her health holds out like her mother's did) and become The Duke of Cambridge. His wife would then become HRH The Duchess of Cambridge. The Queen would also issue letters patent providing their children would be HRH and Prince/Princess of the UK since they will be Charles' grandchildren in the male line.

 

[Elspeth]

She may not, though, with the example of Lady Louise as precedent. I mean, I think it's unlikely that she wouldn't, but with the decision about Lady Louise I don't think it's a foregone conclusion either way.

 

[Elspeth]

I only have one minor alteration Elspeth: and it's with regard to a subsidiary title. Only those titles which pass directly to the monarchs' oldest son, (Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay etcetc) are grouped in such a manner. Other Dukedoms do not necessarily carry with them Marquisates, Earldoms, Vicounties and Baronies.

No, that's true, but since both Andrew and Edward received subsidiary titles, as did the Duke of Edinburgh by George VI and the Dukes of York, Kent, and Gloucester by George V, I assume it's very likely that it would happen.

 

[branchg]

She may not, though, with the example of Lady Louise as precedent. I mean, I think it's unlikely that she wouldn't, but with the decision about Lady Louise I don't think it's a foregone conclusion either way.

I agree. It may be decided that Harry's children will simply enjoy courtesy styles, even when Charles becomes King, as part of the downsizing of the monarchy. It remains to be seen how far they will really go.

 

[Lady Marmalade]

Barony of Watchamacallit....so could this be a subsidiary title for Harry after he is made a Duke...

Thank you all. After reading through all your responses, I think we need to telephone the Queen, sit down over tea, and discuss this situation.

All those in favor will meet tomorrow at Buckingham Palace and then we will drive over to Sandringham...assuming she is still there. I think she needs to hear our side of this discussion.

Who's bringing snacks for the roadtrip there????

 

[branchg]

LOL....HM needs to rectify this situation pronto!

 

[Von Schlesian]

I think she needs to hear our side of this discussion.

Ohh Lady M. Now we can't have Americans understanding the beauty of titles order and protocol! Why don't you see that part of punishing you all for your revolution, was making the whole thing more complicated?

But tomorrow suits me..

 

[Lady Marmalade]

You kids are hysterical...I love it!

It could be worse...you could potentially get a really ignorant American who would call her Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor....lol.

I am American so I am just kidding to all my American counterparts on here!

 

[Lady Marmalade]

Elspeth is bringin the G&T's, right?

 

[Idriel]

The Queen will likely issue letters patent stating Harry's children will be HRH and Prince/Princess of the UK since they are the male-line grandchildren of the future King.

Thank you Elspeth for the answer.
Not wishing to be gloomy there (and not wishing ill to anyone), but that would be making the assumption that Charles will reach the throne. He might be, OK, but accidents happen. If Harry's children are made HRH and say the future King happens to be William, they would then possess a style they are not legally allowed to bear, no (as children of a brother of the sovereign)?

 

[branchg]

My prediction is Harry's children will not be prince/princess of the UK, provided William has married and has children of his own. Once William has an heir, the likelihood of Harry's children succeeding becomes very small.

I think it is inevitable new letters patent will be issued to replace the 1917 Letters Patent of George V, perhaps after Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice marry. The rank of Royal Highness and titular dignity of prince/princess of the UK will very likely be restricted in the future to the children of the sovereign and the children of the Prince of Wales.

 

[Paula**]

Do you guys think in the future maybe will be a chance for equality for men and women in tittle stuff?

I never lose my hopes

 

[Royal Fan]

it could happen

 

[JPhinala]

You know how the son of the Prince of Wales is given the title prince, what if William had a son tommorow? Would he be given the title of Prince too or would he recieve some other title until William becomes the Prince of Wales?

 

[BeatrixFan]

Well, he would become a Prince but he wouldn't get a Dukedom etc until he was much older. But he'd be illegitimate so he'd be out of running for the throne.

 

[Elspeth]

Well, just as things were changed and clarified in 1948 to allow Charles to become HRH Prince Charles because of the unforseen consequence of the heir (Princess Elizabeth) being female, which wasn't allowed for in the Letters Patent of 1917, I expect they'd be changed again to cover the eventuality of a great grandson of the monarch in the eldest-son line.

This web page lists the Letters Patent that have been issued over the last few decades (the links are to pdf files). It's a fairly handy resource.

http://www.cam.ac.uk/societies/cuhags/info/proclp-w.htm

 

[branchg]

The eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales is automatically a Royal Highness and Prince of the UK under the 1917 Letters Patent.

You know how the son of the Prince of Wales is given the title prince, what if William had a son tommorow? Would he be given the title of Prince too or would he recieve some other title until William becomes the Prince of Wales?

He would be HRH Prince X under George V's Letters Patent.
.

 

[branchg]

Do you guys think in the future maybe will be a chance for equality for men and women in tittle stuff?

I never lose my hopes

There is already equality at some level, but it is generally at the will of the Sovereign as fount of honour. Things would have to be drastically changed in common law to allow for equal inheritance of titular dignities and peerages.

 

[RoyalProtocol]

I thought Excellency was higher than honorable b/c I've seen U.S. Presidents ahev the prefix His Excellency and Top Diplomats (like th eSecretary of State and ambassadors) have the Honorable

In The United Kingdom the use of His/Her Excellency is used to refer to ambassadors and high commissioners, not the Honourable as in the US.

The Honourable is used for certain childern of peers who do not have a courtsey title. It is usual to abbreviate it to The Hon. or more archaically The Honble.
An example is The Hon. Angus Ogilvy (before the was given a knighthood and made a Privy Counsellor)

His/Her Excellency is also applied to Governor Generals, Lieutenant Governors and Governors of Commonwealth countries and to Foreign Presidents.

In Europe certain nobles are entitled to use Excellency.

No Peerages in the UK and no Government ministers can use Excellency.
Dukes are His Grace and Duchesses are Her Grace, other titles accorded to other peers ane the Right Honouable, The Most Noble etc.

 

[branchg]

In The United Kingdom the use of His/Her Excellency is used to refer to ambassadors and high commissioners, not the Honourable as in the US.

The use of "The Honourable" is rare when addressing a sitting or former President of the United States. The current officeholder is simply "The President", and addressed as "Mr. President" or "Sir".

A former President is "Former President Surname" and addressed as "Sir" or "President Surname". Sometimes they are introduced as "The Honourable Jimmy Carter", but this is the exception, rather than the rule. Usually, they are introduced as "The 39th President of the United States, Jimmy Carter".

 

[RoyalProtocol]

There are lots of possibilities and we will only fond out on the morning of their weddings!

 

[MOLEY]

I wonder if HM the queen had offered an earldom to prince michael of kent on his wedding day to baroness marie-christine then HRH and his wife would be TRH earl and countess of ????, it would have meant freddie would be a viscount and a new line of titled windsors in the future.

 

[Lady Marmalade]

It still astounds me that these things need to happen.

I know Philip was born a royal prince and had to denounce everything and become a British citizen, but to me he is was still royal and not common, even though the laws or whatever recognized him as such.

Common to me means someone not born into any royal family in any way.

If one uses the arguments then the current heirs to the Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Luxembourg, and Lichtenstein thrones are only half royal.

 

[branchg]

No one ever considered Prince Philip to be anything but royal. In fact, he is more royal than The Queen in Teutonic terms since her mother was technically a commoner as Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon.

By the standards of today's society, the Queen Mother was most certainly a high aristocrat, although not quite as aristocratic as Diana was.

 

[branchg]

I wonder if HM the queen had offered an earldom to prince michael of kent on his wedding day to baroness marie-christine then HRH and his wife would be TRH earl and countess of ????, it would have meant freddie would be a viscount and a new line of titled windsors in the future.

Yes, they would have been styled as TRH Earl and Countess of Whatever, although technically Michael's correct full style would have remained HRH Prince Michael of Kent, The Earl of Whatever.

 

[RoyalProtocol]

Not Right

Yes, they would have been styled as TRH Earl and Countess of Whatever, although technically Michael's correct full style would have remained HRH Prince Michael of Kent, The Earl of Whatever.

I think you are mistaken, when a Royal Prince is given a title he uses the title instead of "Prince x" Take for example: The Duke of York, The Earl of Wessex, The Duke of Gloucester and The Duke of Kent. It is not corredt to say HRH The Prince Andrew, Duke of York. The exception is His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, this is because at the time of his marriage he was given the title HRH The Duke of Edinburgh (having renounced his Greek Title of Prince). However in 1957 HM The Queen granted Him the title of The Prince Philip and this title was added before the Duke of Edinburgh part.