Questions about British Styles and Titles 2: Sep 2022 - Aug 2023

[muriel]

Have Prince and/or Princess Michael of Kent fully retired from their private careers, and if not, are either of them still using their titles commercially?

What do you mean by "are either of them still using their titles commercially"?

I think Marie-Christiane still writes books from time to time. I do not know if Michael is doing any consultancy work any more.

 

[wbenson]

If the Palace is advising the inclusion of "Consort," that makes me think it will probably be in the Church of England prayers too, which I take as a big sign that it's here to stay.

The royal warrant for the Church of England's prayers for the royal family was issued last week, and as I suspected, the pre-1952 form "our gracious Queen _______" has not been used; instead it is "Camilla the Queen Consort."

 

[Kataryn]

Does the wording matter? It's the same principle that is discussed here: does the king have to refer to tradition or can he make his own wordings?

It's the same as when they used Duchess of Cornwall instead of Princess of Wales, the higher title Camilla had courtesy of being the wife of the Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall. For political reasons they called her the DoC. Now she is Camilla, the Queen Consort rather than the older version. (Makes me wonder how they managed the change from queen Victoria to Queen Consort Alexandra?)
It's the same IMHO with saying someone (like H&M) have the title of TRH, but don't use them or whether they are stripped of them. It's just more polite that way. (and maybe more modern?)
Maybe they should make public that to address in such a case is to use the American style like "Madam Vice-President" to say "Madam Duchess"?
Thinks seem to be changing in BP, but as long as there is no announcement from there, we don't really know what's going on.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The royal warrant for the Church of England's prayers for the royal family was issued last week, and as I suspected, the pre-1952 form "our gracious Queen _______" has not been used; instead it is "Camilla the Queen Consort."

My minister, a CoE minister, used His Majesty King Charles and Her Majesty Queen Camilla on Sunday. Of course living in Australia he may have had different instructions from the CoE in Australia.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It is interesting to see how members of the royal family were named in Queen Elizabeth II's death certificate:

Forename(s)
Elizabeth Alexandra Mary

Surname(s)
Windsor

Occupation
Her Majesty The Queen

[...]

Forename(s), surname(s) and occupation of spouse(s) or civil partner(s)
His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

Forename(s), surname(s) and occupation of father/parent
Albert Frederick Arthur George Windsor
King George VI
(deceased)

Forename(s), surname(s) and occupation of mother/parent
Elizabeth Angela Marguerite Bowes-Lyon (ms) or Windsor
Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother
(deceased)

Signature of informant, how qualified to give information and address
(Signed) Anne (Transcribed)
HRH The Princess Royal, Daughter

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//images/entry-in-the-register-of-deaths-hm-the-queen.jpg

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/news/...eases-extract-of-death-entry-for-hm-the-queen

As LaBettie asked in another thread, why no surname for Philip?

 

[Duke of Leaside]

It is interesting to see how members of the royal family were named in Queen Elizabeth II's death certificate:



https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//images/entry-in-the-register-of-deaths-hm-the-queen.jpg

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/news/...eases-extract-of-death-entry-for-hm-the-queen

As LaBettie asked in another thread, why no surname for Philip?

Yes curious why no surname (Mountbatten) for Philip; or Anne (Laurence).

So HM Queen Elizabeth II was born a Windsor and died a Windsor, but she was a Mountbatten for 4.5 years after she was married. (She was a Mountbatten from November 20, 1947 to April 9, 1952).

 

[Prinsara]

It is interesting to see how members of the royal family were named in Queen Elizabeth II's death certificate:



https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//images/entry-in-the-register-of-deaths-hm-the-queen.jpg

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/news/...eases-extract-of-death-entry-for-hm-the-queen

As LaBettie asked in another thread, why no surname for Philip?

Maybe they forgot?

Maybe after giving up Mountbatten to marry Elizabeth, not technically being a Windsor, and Mountbatten-Windsor not applying to him, in the end, he didn't have one?

Maybe Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg wouldn't fit.

 

[ronald biver]

Yes curious why no surname (Mountbatten) for Philip; or Anne (Laurence).

So HM Queen Elizabeth II was born a Windsor and died a Windsor, but she was a Mountbatten for 4.5 years after she was married. (She was a Mountbatten from November 20, 1947 to April 9, 1952).

I was wondering about the name Mountbatten, maybe privately in formal papers but not publicly. that is a new subject to talk about it, thanks!!

 

[Toledo]

Maybe they forgot?

Maybe after giving up Mountbatten to marry Elizabeth, not technically being a Windsor, and Mountbatten-Windsor not applying to him, in the end, he didn't have one?

Maybe Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg wouldn't fit.

Don't forget of Greece and Denmark on that mix too. I remember as a kid getting confused on then Prince Juan Carlos' wife Princess Sofia of Greece and later hearing Queen of Spain Sofia of Greece. Until an aunt cleared the Greek Royals had no surnames so the of Greece was used by her and her sister Irene.

I was baffled until years later while reading the history of post WWI Turkey I read that Kemal Ataturk had everyone rush for surnames as recent as 1934, so it's not strange for a royal not to have one.

 

[wbenson]

I'm not sure we should be looking to these kinds of papers for any kind of consistency whatsoever, but it may be that the office that collects death statistics has a rule that peerages are used in lieu of surnames. (That's how British passports work, I think.)

 

[Prinsara]

How was he listed on his own certificate? I do remember the "old age" there.

 

[Iluvbertie]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...d-age-official-death-certificate-reveals.html

It lists the Duke’s full name as: ‘His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh formerly known as Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark formerly known as Philip Mountbatten.’

The certificate lists his occupation as ‘Naval Officer’, a successful career of which he was enormously proud, and ‘Prince of the United Kingdom’

His second occupation is listed as ‘husband of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, The Sovereign’

 

[Prinsara]

That's more "formerly" than most women.

Especially his wife!

....and didn't they get the timeline wrong? Seems like that should have been "formerly known as Philip Mountbatten formerly known as Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark".

 

[HenRach Dominion]

Random thought:

If either HRH The Prince of Wales or HRH Prince George of Wales wanted to use Elizabeth as a regnal name, which combination(s) would be correct in referring to him?

King Elizabeth I
HM King Elizabeth I
Elizabeth I
King Elizabeth III
HM King Elizabeth III
Elizabeth III

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Random thought:

If either HRH The Prince of Wales or HRH Prince George of Wales wanted to use Elizabeth as a regnal name, which combination(s) would be correct in referring to him?

King Elizabeth I
HM King Elizabeth I
Elizabeth I
King Elizabeth III
HM King Elizabeth III
Elizabeth III

I don’t think George would use his great-grandmothers name as a regnal name.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The royal warrant for the Church of England's prayers for the royal family was issued last week, and as I suspected, the pre-1952 form "our gracious Queen _______" has not been used; instead it is "Camilla the Queen Consort."

Interesting. The new form seems more consistent with the form "William Prince of Wales" (but why is it "the Princess of Wales" and not "Catherine Princess of Wales" to be consistent with her husband?).

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...d-age-official-death-certificate-reveals.html

It lists the Duke’s full name as: ‘His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh formerly known as Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark formerly known as Philip Mountbatten.’

The certificate lists his occupation as ‘Naval Officer’, a successful career of which he was enormously proud, and ‘Prince of the United Kingdom’

His second occupation is listed as ‘husband of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, The Sovereign’

I wonder when he was known as "of Denmark". The royal family of Greece typically did not use their Danish titles, and while serving in the British military Philip signed "Philip, Prince of Greece".

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...ge-life-profile-of-prince-philip-1563268.html

 

[Tatiana Maria]

What do you mean by "are either of them still using their titles commercially"?

I think Marie-Christiane still writes books from time to time. I do not know if Michael is doing any consultancy work any more.

Using their titles for activities which earn them money, including the paid consultancy and writing books for sale.

Random thought:

If either HRH The Prince of Wales or HRH Prince George of Wales wanted to use Elizabeth as a regnal name, which combination(s) would be correct in referring to him?

King Elizabeth I
HM King Elizabeth I
Elizabeth I
King Elizabeth III
HM King Elizabeth III
Elizabeth III

I can't recall a historical precedent in Europe for the same regnal name being used by both a Queen and a King. My personal preference would be to number all the monarchs of that name, regardless of gender.

Not sure if this has even been brought up but given that a daughter can now out ranks younger brother what is a possibility that Charlotte being made a Duchess. I know that has never been done but if a Queen can have her Coronation broadcast live on TV 70 years ago and 70 years later a son have his accession broadcast live on TV what is the thoughts that Charlotte be named Duchess of x. Just curious what others have thought?

There have been numerous past TRF discussions on this subject; I'm afraid I don't have time at the moment to search for them, but you can find them using the search form.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/search.php

Maybe after giving up Mountbatten to marry Elizabeth, not technically being a Windsor, and Mountbatten-Windsor not applying to him, in the end, he didn't have one?

Did he, though? As a man, wouldn't his surname have remained the same after marriage unless he specifically changed it by deed poll?

 

[Prinsara]

As a man, wouldn't his surname have remained the same after marriage unless he specifically changed it by deed poll?

I don't believe there is any specified process for changing a name in the UK; to the best of my knowledge you are allowed to just start doing it as long as it is not for fraudulent or otherwise illegal purposes. Of course I don't know about the legality of it, or with reference to the specific time frame, or I could just be plain wrong.

As Philip became HRH I can't think when he would have needed Mountbatten anymore, and as it wasn't his birth name there is a bit of a crack it fell into. As I have said before, he clearly wanted it back when he tried to separate his identity from Elizabeth's.

 

[Iluvbertie]

That's more "formerly" than most women.

Especially his wife!

....and didn't they get the timeline wrong? Seems like that should have been "formerly known as Philip Mountbatten formerly known as Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark".

I think they went from his birth to death rather than backwards.

 

[duchessrachel]

Title of Queen Camilla

I have seen in various news articles with references to "Queen Consort Camilla". I know that she is a Consort because King Charles, her husband, is king. The thing that bothers me is why she is not being called "Queen Camilla". The Queen Mother was called "Queen Elizabeth" when King George VI was king, and Queen Mary was called "Queen Mary" when King George V was king. I don't recall another case where "Consort" was placed in the title. I am an American and I certainly don't have a say in this, but it really irks me. Isn't she supposed to be called "Queen Camilla"?

 

[duchessrachel]

The Princess of Wales

Now that Duchess of Cambridge is the Princess of Wales, do you think that King Charles will eventually write letters patent giving her the title of "Princess" so that referring to her as Princess Catherine will be correct. It seems that the news media still can't stop calling her Kate Middleton and that it would be easier to make her title Princess, since that is what a lot of people are going to call her anyway. I know writing letters patent do not depend on what makes it easier for people, but given that I have heard he views her as the daughter he never had, it would really be great if he did.

 

[Alison H]

Yes, she should be Queen Camilla. "The Queen Consort" has never been used to describe anyone else. I think it's maybe that everyone's so used to thinking of Queen Elizabeth II as "The Queen" that it's hard to get used to thinking of anyone else as "the Queen".

The oddly-worded announcement when the Queen died didn't help: it said that "The King and the Queen Consort" would be returning to London, and the media seem to have latched on to that. Even the www.royal.gov.uk website says "King and Queen Consort" rather than "King and Queen". But, again, maybe it's just too soon to use the term "the Queen" to mean anyone else. "King Charles and Queen Camilla" would be better.

 

[bethaliz6894]

I have seen in various news articles with references to "Queen Consort Camilla". I know that she is a Consort because King Charles, her husband, is king. The thing that bothers me is why she is not being called "Queen Camilla". The Queen Mother was called "Queen Elizabeth" when King George VI was king, and Queen Mary was called "Queen Mary" when King George V was king. I don't recall another case where "Consort" was placed in the title. I am an American and I certainly don't have a say in this, but it really irks me. Isn't she supposed to be called "Queen Camilla"?

Queen Consort, in my understanding, is a Queen that is married to a King. Queen Mother and Queen Mary were Consorts.

 

[theroyalfly]

I have seen in various news articles with references to "Queen Consort Camilla". I know that she is a Consort because King Charles, her husband, is king. The thing that bothers me is why she is not being called "Queen Camilla". The Queen Mother was called "Queen Elizabeth" when King George VI was king, and Queen Mary was called "Queen Mary" when King George V was king. I don't recall another case where "Consort" was placed in the title. I am an American and I certainly don't have a say in this, but it really irks me. Isn't she supposed to be called "Queen Camilla"?

She is Queen Camilla. No doubts about that.

Now that Duchess of Cambridge is the Princess of Wales, do you think that King Charles will eventually write letters patent giving her the title of "Princess" so that referring to her as Princess Catherine will be correct. It seems that the news media still can't stop calling her Kate Middleton and that it would be easier to make her title Princess, since that is what a lot of people are going to call her anyway. I know writing letters patent do not depend on what makes it easier for people, but given that I have heard he views her as the daughter he never had, it would really be great if he did.

I don't think so. This mistake is not damaging at all. This has been ongoing for years as the press and the royal fans used to refer to Diana as 'Princess Diana.' But for people like us who knows that in the UK, there are two types of Princesses, princess of the Royal blood and princesses by marriage. We can just laugh about it.

 

[Somebody]

Now that Duchess of Cambridge is the Princess of Wales, do you think that King Charles will eventually write letters patent giving her the title of "Princess" so that referring to her as Princess Catherine will be correct. It seems that the news media still can't stop calling her Kate Middleton and that it would be easier to make her title Princess, since that is what a lot of people are going to call her anyway. I know writing letters patent do not depend on what makes it easier for people, but given that I have heard he views her as the daughter he never had, it would really be great if he did.

No, there is no reason to do so. By virtue of her marriage, she is already HRH Catherine Elizabeth, Princess of Wales, Duchess of Cornwall, Rothesay and Cambridge, Countess of Cheser, Carrick and Strathearn, Baroness of Renfrew and Carrickfergus, Lady of the Isles, Princess and Great Stewardess of Scotland, Princess William. No reason to give her an additional title. It is not a problem of the BRF to solve this non-problem of the press.

 

[Prinsara]

I have seen in various news articles with references to "Queen Consort Camilla". I know that she is a Consort because King Charles, her husband, is king. The thing that bothers me is why she is not being called "Queen Camilla". The Queen Mother was called "Queen Elizabeth" when King George VI was king, and Queen Mary was called "Queen Mary" when King George V was king. I don't recall another case where "Consort" was placed in the title. I am an American and I certainly don't have a say in this, but it really irks me. Isn't she supposed to be called "Queen Camilla"?

No, her actual title is The Queen Consort. "Queen Consort Camilla" is a way to avoid confusing people who are unaware of that.

They can't simply call her "The Queen", as most queens consort were known while their husbands were reigning, both because everybody still associates that with somebody else and because the (former) Queen's stated wish was that she be known as "Queen Consort".

Informally, yes, she's Queen Camilla like every other monarchy.

 

[Skippy]

The Queen Consort is a major promotion from the formerly intended The Princess Consort.

However, at this moment I wonder and I do think the question has some relevance:
Had Diana still lived and she and Charles still been married, had Diana also be known as The Queen Consort or would she already have been referred to as Queen Diana?
Like indeed Queen Elizabeth, Queen Mary and so on.

 

[Meee]

The Queen Consort is a major promotion from the formerly intended The Princess Consort.

However, at this moment I wonder and I do think the question has some relevance:
Had Diana still lived and she and Charles still been married, had Diana also be known as The Queen Consort or would she already have been referred to as Queen Diana?
Like indeed Queen Elizabeth, Queen Mary and so on.

Probably, she would be the mother of the future monarch and in this scenario they would still be married, so nothing at all to distinguish her from Elizabeth and Mary.

I do think the consort title in general needs looking at. Prince Philip was known as that, presumably as for him to have had the title of King would outrank Queen given the male primogeniture at the time. But if it’s now all equal, surely it should be Queen Consort and King Consort (so it’s clear who the regnant is) or all consorts should be Prince or Princess. And male consorts should be crowned with their spouse as Camilla will be.

 

[Prinsara]

The Queen Consort is a major promotion from the formerly intended The Princess Consort.

However, at this moment I wonder and I do think the question has some relevance:
Had Diana still lived and she and Charles still been married, had Diana also be known as The Queen Consort or would she already have been referred to as Queen Diana?
Like indeed Queen Elizabeth, Queen Mary and so on.

All those Queens were only referred to as such after the death of their husbands.

Diana would in all likelihood have been HM The Queen, informally Queen Diana.

Probably, she would be the mother of the future monarch and in this scenario they would still be married, so nothing at all to distinguish her from Elizabeth and Mary.

I do think the consort title in general needs looking at. Prince Philip was known as that, presumably as for him to have had the title of King would outrank Queen given the male primogeniture at the time. But if it’s now all equal, surely it should be Queen Consort and King Consort (so it’s clear who the regnant is) or all consorts should be Prince or Princess. And male consorts should be crowned with their spouse as Camilla will be.

Philip was The Duke of Edinburgh, not prince consort. The Prince Consort was Albert, and only for the last few years of his life. Before that he was just Prince Albert.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Regardless of how people feel, Camilla is Queen by virtue of her marriage to King Charles III and she will remain Queen till she dies. Of course she isn’t a Queen regnant, but a consort just like QEQM was a consort to the late Queen Elizabeth II’s father.