Titles of the Edinburgh Children

[Ish]

Can you provide a source/link to prove that statement? I have never read of them ever commenting on their childrens titles beyond the initial statement from BP at the time of their marriage.

I've never read either of them saying as such - and if you read through some of the older posts on this page it seems to imply that the issue is unclear.

It's unclear whether or not Louise and James are entitled to use the HRH but don't because of the will of their parents, or if the Queen expressing her Will stating that they will be styled as the children of an Earl was enough to strip them of their HRHs.

What I think is likely is they don't actually have an HRH - they have been stripped of the title by the Queen's Will - but HM was intentionally vague on that matter so that if they ever come to her or Charles (as an adult) and say "Granny/Uncle Charles, I want to be a Prince(ss)" then the monarch's Will can be made known that they will be styled as such.

 

[NGalitzine]

Thanks Gracie but I will hold out for a reliable news source on this one. Not saying you are wrong just looking for a reliable UK news source. Even if true I very much doubt either child would be silly enough to adopt the title and style if they did not need to.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

Oh, I can never see Louise or James waking up as adults and saying, "you know, I'm going to dust off that HRH," which is the only thing that would lead to possible litigation on the issue.

It's one of those legal issues which is nebulous right now. Legal issues often are.

So on whether James and Louise are legally HRHs; I don't know and neither do you.

 

[Ish]

So on whether James and Louise are legally HRHs; I don't know and neither do you.

I think only the Queen knows. Maybe the Wessexes and other family members, but not likely.

Yeah.. I'm going with only the Queen knows.

 

[Ish]

Gun salutes are fired for the birth of every prince or princess, no matter where their place is in the line of succession, the Ministry of Defense said today (re Baby Cambridge). The last royal salute for a birth was for Princess Eugenie in 1990.
If James and Louise are still a prince and princess, why no gun salutes for them?

Because they're being treated like the children of an Earl, not like royals.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Both Sophie and Edward have stated that their children can retain their HRH when they become of age if they choose too and further this effects no future HRHs

Please provide a link to this statement.

I have been following the royals for over 50 years and the only thing I have ever heard/read on this is that there is some debate about whether of not The Queen's will being made known is all that is required to remove or give a title.

I have never seen anything from Edward and/or Sophie that says that the children retain the HRH when they come of age.

 

[Molly2101]

Someone just asked a question and I hadn't ever thought about it before. Will Louise and James be allowed to vote when they become 18? If we are to believe they are legally HRH, then they are not allowed to vote?

Am I right in saying that any of those in the BRF who are titled HRH have no ability to vote?

 

[Ish]

Someone just asked a question and I hadn't ever thought about it before. Will Louise and James be allowed to vote when they become 18? If we are to believe they are legally HRH, then they are not allowed to vote?

Am I right in saying that any of those in the BRF who are titled HRH have no ability to vote?

HRHs are allowed to vote, they chose not to because doing so removes their political neutrality. With the exception of the Queen, any family member can vote but chose not to. I would suspect that the same will happen with the Wessex children.

 

[ShannyD]

Someone just asked a question and I hadn't ever thought about it before. Will Louise and James be allowed to vote when they become 18? If we are to believe they are legally HRH, then they are not allowed to vote?

Am I right in saying that any of those in the BRF who are titled HRH have no ability to vote?

I think the only legal limits to who can vote are the Queen and the Prince of Wales. Technically the rest of the royal family can vote, but choose not to.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Until 1999 the peers of the realm couldn't vote for the House of Commons as they had a seat in the House of Lords - the distinction between a commoner and a peer - so ALL members of the royal family can now vote but choose not to do so.

All of them can vote - even The Queen but they chose not to do so:

http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandGovernment/Queenandvoting.aspx

Although the law relating to elections does not specifically prohibit the Sovereign from voting in a general election or local election, it is considered unconstitutional for the Sovereign and his or her heir to do so.

Legally they can all vote but they don't because there are questions about whether it is constitutional for them to do so - so to find out if it was constitutional or not one of them would have to try to vote and test the legal and constitutional situation - they won't do that and thus accept the fact that they don't have a right available to every other citizen.

The rest of them choose not to vote but are legally able to do so.

 

[BelleMia]

I can't imagine that will ever happen. I do hope that Charles will recreate the Duke of Edinburgh title for Edward, as was promised to him by the Queen and Prince Philip. Louise will likely never inherit a Peerage and I doubt she will choose to use her HRH title when she turns 18. I think she'll want to live a normal life, even though being referred to as Lady Louise isn't exactly "normal". James, no matter if he chooses to not use his HRH title, will always have more association with the family than his sister as the Duke of Edinburgh title will have famous history behind it and he will always be associated with his grandfather.

Someone said on another Royal website that in many, many years to come we will see James, Duke of Edinburgh as he'll be most likely be styled that way by then, attending the funeral of the Queen Catherine, the Queen Mother and people will say he is the youngest grandchild of the late Queen Elizabeth II. He'll have a lot to live up to with the title as his grand father is quite a character!

I think that is what annoys me so much about Edward and Sophie removing their titles. James will still get a prestigious title or titles and as a modern woman I think (hope) I would have not agreed with Edward when I saw where it will leave my daughter.

Further Edward and Sophie are living in fantasy land (sorry American expression) what exactly was the title change actually supposed to do or accomplish. James and Louisa are still who they are by birth and the world knows it - why play pretend .

The idea that somehow changing their titles makes them "ordinary people" is ludicrous - they are still the grandchildren of a queen, the nephews and neice and cousins of 2 future kings and the still belong to the most famous royal family in the world with a storied history going back centuries.

They were born "different" as God seemed to want it - suck it up and deal with it. jmo

 

[LadyGabrielle]

On another thread it was said that now that Lady Louise is 10 years old she will no longer be a royal child, Im not understanding that. Can someone please explain? She is afterall the daughter of a Prince. Confusing.

 

[Lumutqueen]

On another thread it was said that now that Lady Louise is 10 years old she will no longer be a royal child, Im not understanding that. Can someone please explain? She is afterall the daughter of a Prince. Confusing.

Age has nothing to do with her being royal. Lady Louise will be royal all her life, whether she chooses to use the title Princess might be up to her when she turns 18.

 

[Ish]

It's debated whether or not the Wessex children royal at all because the way in which their titles were announced doesn't make it clear if this is a case of them using a lesser title instead, or if it's them being stripped of the greater title.

That said, Louise turning 10 does nothing to change it. She is no more or less royal at 10 than she was at 9. She will remain in this unclear title spot until such time as either she begins to use her greater title, the monarch makes it clear she does not hold a greater title, or LPs are issued changing who has and who does not have the greater title in general.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I suspect that it is the word 'child' rather than royal that has changed - she is now a 'tween' rather than a 'child' having turned 10.

Whether she is 'royal' like William, Harry, Beatrice and Eugenie or just a member of the royal family like Peter and Zara comes down to the interpretation of the announcement in 1999 - which never suggested that she or James ever could let alone would take the styles of HRH Prince/Princess.

The Queen's will has been made known and that is enough for many people.

 

[amaryllus]

She is aristocratic young lady with close royal connections. A lady and granddaughter of a queen will never be on the level of a Savannah or Ilsa Philips.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Savannah and Isla Philips are great-granddaugthers of a Queen -without any titles due to the sexist nature of British titles and nothing else.

Louise is called - Lady - while her first cousin - equally a granddaughter of The Queen, Zara, is simply a Miss as she comes from a girl and not a boy.

 

[Ish]

Savannah and Isla Philips are great-granddaugthers of a Queen -without any titles due to the sexist nature of British titles and nothing else.

Louise is called - Lady - while her first cousin - equally a granddaughter of The Queen, Zara, is simply a Miss as she comes from a girl and not a boy.

Zara and Peter don't have any titles because their father chose to not receive a title upon his marriage - otherwise they would be more than Mrs. and Mrs. as well. Likewise, if Mark Phillips had been given a title, Savannah and Islam would likely have titles as well.

 

[GracieGiraffe]

Mark Phillips would have been made an earl, and therefore his son would be a viscount and his daughters "honorables," same as Linley's children. Zara's children would still be mr/miss.

British titles are indeed sexist, but I think Anne capitalized on it and raised her children as normally as possible, and lack of titles was all part of that normalcy.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Zara and Peter don't have any titles because their father chose to not receive a title upon his marriage - otherwise they would be more than Mrs. and Mrs. as well. Likewise, if Mark Phillips had been given a title, Savannah and Islam would likely have titles as well.

I am fully aware of why Peter and Zara don't have titles - that doesn't change the fact that Zara is equally a granddaughter of The Queen - not a Princess or a Lady though. The reason for her not having one of those titles by right is because her descent is through a girl and not a boy - simple sexism.

One day the BRF will actually decide to do something about that - and the thin edge of the wedge is already there with Louise and James not being Princess and Prince.

I can see the day when only the children of the eldest child of the monarch has any titles and all others are simply Miss and Mr - if it is good enough for the children of girls then it is good enough for the children of boys as well.

 

[Molly2101]

I agree iluvbertie about children of the eldest child only having titles. I think that is what will happen someday. I feel Charles will explain this to William and he or William will make new LP explaining this. It would naturally slim down the amount of HRH's the BRF has.

 

[LadyGabrielle]

Well for crying out loud, I hope so! This is way too complicated. There needs to be a change and I am so looking forward to it. This sexist thing and not wanting titles for children is rediculous. If children are born then let them have their titles. They are a part of the BRF no matter what. Whether they are male, female or anything in between should not matter. I just hope someone changes this title issue in the future before I go completely bonkers trying to figure it out! K. Im done ranting.

 

[Molly2101]

Well for crying out loud, I hope so! This is way too complicated. There needs to be a change and I am so looking forward to it. This sexist thing and not wanting titles for children is rediculous. If children are born then let them have their titles. They are a part of the BRF no matter what. Whether they are male, female or anything in between should not matter. I just hope someone changes this title issue in the future before I go completely bonkers trying to figure it out! K. Im done ranting.

If Louise and James were using their HRH style then in years to come they would be in the same predicament as Beatrice and Eugenie, who are now becoming of the age where they need to work to earn money. They have to do this as the general public refuse to pay for them as they don't feel they do anything for the BRF, even though we know they do engagements etc. I think Edward and Sophie did well in deciding their children should not be HRH's as they knew the trouble it would likely cause in the future. I think that they should do it like the Netherland's and Norway (I believe) - the children of the son's of the Monarch, other than the heir, are called Count's and Countess's.

 

[sophie25]

Yeah, the whole thing needs tidied up in a formal way ie with new letters patent. I think that if the Queen dosn't do this then Charles will. If it were me I would make Beatrice and Eugenie Ladies and Lady Louise and her brother's existing titles would formally be the only ones they held. I would also give Harry's children the same with only William and Kates being HRH. That would make it all nice and tidy LOL!

 

[EllieCat]

i'd like to think, on that far distant day hopefully when Edward and Sophie become Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh, that Louise and james will then be Princess Louise and Prince James of Edinburgh. I too don't like a slimmed down monarchy.

On another note didn't Sophie look stunning at the Dr Who/Buckingham Palace reception; I don't think I've rarely seen her look better.

 

[Molly2101]

Yeah, the whole thing needs tidied up in a formal way ie with new letters patent. I think that if the Queen dosn't do this then Charles will. If it were me I would make Beatrice and Eugenie Ladies and Lady Louise and her brother's existing titles would formally be the only ones they held. I would also give Harry's children the same with only William and Kates being HRH. That would make it all nice and tidy LOL!

I prefer the idea of Harry's children being Lords and Ladies. I agree that Beatrice and Eugenie should be made Ladies but that wont happen. Charles will likely create new LP's stating only the eldest child (male or female) and their children shall enjoy the style of Royal Highness. He will not, however, make it retrospective thus the York sisters will still retain their Royal Highness title.

 

[MarleneKoenig]

Age has nothing to do with her being royal. Lady Louise will be royal all her life, whether she chooses to use the title Princess might be up to her when she turns 18.

According to the 1917 Letters patent, children of the Sovereign and grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line are HRH Prince or Princess, as well as the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. The Queen issued a new LP to give the HRH and title of Prince or princess to the children of the Duke of Cambridge. (All would have been upgraded automatically when Charles became king.)

At the time of the marriage, and reiterated when Louise was born, it was announced that Edward's children would be styled as children of an earl. Louise and James are technically royal, but not styled as such. It is not a choice. At age 18, Louise will not be able to say hey, I want to use the HRH and title Princess. Not going to happen. This was a decision made by the Queen and the Wessexes. Eventually, the children will have the title and rank of a duke's children ... after the death of the Duke of Edinburgh and the succession of Charles III - will Charles be able to create a new Duke of Edinburgh title for Edward. If the Duke dies before the queen, Charles succeeds according to the 1947 LP. Philip's male heirs. It will be a new creation for Edward.

 

[Lumutqueen]

At the time of the marriage, and reiterated when Louise was born, it was announced that Edward's children would be styled as children of an earl. Louise and James are technically royal, but not styled as such. It is not a choice. At age 18, Louise will not be able to say hey, I want to use the HRH and title Princess. Not going to happen. This was a decision made by the Queen and the Wessexes. Eventually, the children will have the title and rank of a duke's children ... after the death of the Duke of Edinburgh and the succession of Charles III - will Charles be able to create a new Duke of Edinburgh title for Edward. If the Duke dies before the queen, Charles succeeds according to the 1947 LP. Philip's male heirs. It will be a new creation for Edward.

Was it though? Because my interpretation is that Edward and Sophie requested their children be styled as that of an Earl and The Queen allowed this to happen. Have they been stripped of their birthright? Has a new LP been issued? Has anyone concretely said they cannot be known as Prince and Princess in the future when they come to understand their situation?

Don't get me wrong, I don't think they will, I just don't think the option has been entirely deprived from them.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There is one interpretation that is that is required is for the Queen's will to be made known - that LPs etc aren't needed - and if that interpretation is correct then they have been deprived of the right to be HRH Prince/Princess.

 

[Lumutqueen]

There is one interpretation that is that is required is for the Queen's will to be made known - that LPs etc aren't needed - and if that interpretation is correct then they have been deprived of the right to be HRH Prince/Princess.

So, in that scenario The Queen's say so could deprive anyone of their titles yes? No written law would be necessary at all?

Is The Queen's will approving something her son wishes for his children despite the fact she might not have wanted it?

I hate to complicate the situation but, if this was to be a permanent thing surely LPs could have been done just like they were for the Cambridges.