Prince Harry and Meghan

  • Thread starter Thread starter cmodrmac
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
phil19034 said:
She is Duchess Katherine and will be eventually Queen Katherine, but will never be Princess Katherine unless her Father-in-law makes her a Princess when he’s king - which is doubtful.
Click to expand...
She’ll be HRH Catherine, Princess of Wales when Charles and Camilla become King and Queen and William becomes the Prince of Wales. Technically, Camilla now is HRH, Camilla, Princess of Wales.
 
No. The wife of a prince becomes a princess. Kate has her own title, because she is Princess William — her “princess” title derives from her husband, just as her “Duchess” title does.

True she will never be Princess Katherine … partly because her name is Catherine. She is, however, Princess William.
 
No, she will be HRH The Princess of Wales. Prince Charles’ first wife was HRH The Princess of Wales until they divorced. Only then did she become Diana, Princess of Wales.
 
ConstantLearner said:
40.png
phil19034:
She is Duchess Katherine and will be eventually Queen Katherine, but will never be Princess Katherine unless her Father-in-law makes her a Princess when he’s king - which is doubtful.
Click to expand...
She’ll be HRH Catherine, Princess of Wales when Charles and Camilla become King and Queen and William becomes the Prince of Wales. Technically, Camilla now is HRH, Camilla, Princess of Wales.
Click to expand...
Correct. She will be HRH Catherine, Princess of Wales.

But her kids will be HRH Prince George of Wales and HRH Princess Charlotte of Wales. And her Husband will be HRH Prince William, Prince of Wales.

William and the kids have the Prince/Princess Prefix, Kate will never have that. She only gets the suffix because the Prince/Princess prefix is reserved to people born into the title of who are promoted into the title due to their advancement in the line of succession.

Since Kate is not in the line of succession, she will never have the prefix of “Princess.”

God Bless
 
Well the US didn’t fight a war to free me from anything (apart, I suppose, from the cost of America’s border defences).

Most of the Royal Family’s finery comes from their own resources. Keeping up the palaces etc would fall on the State even if we became a republic (see France — or indeed Russia).

Having a hereditary head of state is of course logically indefensible. Until you take a look at some of the non-hereditary heads of state about the World.
 
No, she will not be Catherine, Princess of Wales. She will be The Princess of Wales. She does have what you call the prefix, because she is Princess William.
 
Last edited:
I disagree that the wife of a prince always becomes a princess. Don’t think Meg will EVER be one:

Diana, Titles and Styles

1 July 1961 – 9 June 1975: The Honourable Diana Frances Spencer

9 June 1975 – 29 July 1981: Lady Diana Frances Spencer

29 July 1981 – 28 August 1996: Her Royal Highness The Princess of Wales; in Scotland: 29 July 1981 – 28 August 1996: Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Rothesay

28 August 1996 – 31 August 1997: Diana, Princess of Wales

Note: NO Princess Charles

Catherine, Titles and Styles

Upon her marriage in 2011, Catherine Middleton became known as “Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge.” A fuller version of her title and style is “Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn and Lady Carrickfergus.” In Scotland, she is also styled as “Her Royal Highness The Countess of Strathearn.”

Note: NO Princess William

Camilla, Titles and Sryles

17 July 1947 – 4 July 1973: Miss Camilla Rosemary Shand

4 July 1973 – 3 March 1995: Mrs Andrew Parker Bowles

3 March 1995 – 9 April 2005: Mrs Camilla Parker Bowles

9 April 2005 – present : Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cornwall; in Scotland: 9 April 2005 – present: Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Rothesay; in Chester: The Countess of Chester

Although legally she is Princess of Wales, Camilla has adopted the feminine form of her husband’s highest-ranking subsidiary title, Duke of Cornwall, because the title Princess of Wales became strongly associated with the previous holder of that title, Diana. She will legally become queen consort, in accordance with English common law, if Charles becomes king. Clarence House stated on the occasion of their wedding in 2005 that Camilla would adopt the style of Princess Consort, but there is no legal or historical precedent for such a title. “Princess Consort” mirrors the style of Albert, Prince Consort, husband of Queen Victoria.

Note: NO Princess Charles

What silliness anyway. On this board!
 
Last edited:
PickyPicky said:
No. The wife of a prince becomes a princess. Kate has her own title, because she is Princess William — her “princess” title derives from her husband, just as her “Duchess” title does.

True she will never be Princess Katherine … partly because her name is Catherine. She is, however, Princess William.
Click to expand...
In rank and suffix yes. But not in prefix nor her own merit.

Pretend for a moment William was a doctor and not a prince. His title would be Dr. William Windsor, M.D.

Kate would be Mrs. Dr. William Windsor, M.D. But she would not be Dr Kate Windsor, M.D nor would she be Mrs. Dr. Kate Windsor.

She would only have the prefix of Doctor when using his first name because a prefix is granted only based on ones personal merits (birth, degrees, etc).

The suffex is the office the person holds.

A better example would be President of the United States and First Lady.

If William & Kate were Americans and William was elected President, his title would be President William Windsor, President of the United States, while Kate would be be Mrs. Catherine Windsor, First Lady of the United States.

The First Lady receives a suffix, based on her office, but does not receive the prefix President. A

prince and princess are the exact same station, a princess is not a wife of a prince, but the daughter or grand daughter of a sovereign (or great grand daughter in select situations). Same with a prince.

Note: while Kate will one day have the office of Princess of Wales, Megan will never remotely come close to being a princess because Harry will never be the Prince of Wales.

God Bless
 
PickyPicky said:
No, she will not be Catherine, Princess of Wales. She will be The Princess of Wales. She does have what you call the prefix, because she is Princess William.
Click to expand...
No. A prefix comes before your own name.

She will NOT be called the Princess William Catherine. The prefix of Princess will never come before her name of Catherine, only after her name.
 
Last edited:
What Phil and I are saying is they never ACTUALLY BECOME royal. They never actually BECOME a princess on their own merit, as Phil said. Diana had much royal blood, but on her own merit, she only merited the title, “Lady.” If I remember correctly, QEII is one of her godmothers, and Diana grew up calling her “Aunt Lilibet.”

Catherine and Meg are commoners. Therefore, they adopt the highest ranking title OF THEIR HUSBAND. Charles’ highest rank was Prince of Wales. William’s is Duke. Prince George and Princess Charlotte were born royal. The queen will no doubt confer a dukedom on Harry, giving Meg a “duchess” title. No one is ever called “The Princess Henry, William, Charles” or anything else.

In the US, they will just be Kate and Meg. The price they pay for losing the war, I guess. 😀
 
Furthermore the prefix of Queen and Princess are not the same.

As I mentioned above, Princess means you are a daughter or granddaughter of a sovereign (even a dead one), while Queen means either the wife of a king or the female version of king.

King / Queen is more a kin to Duke / Duchess than to Prince / Princess.

For example: a Duchess is the wife of a Duke because women cannot inherit a dukedom, except for the Queen sovereign. For example Queen Elizabeth is actually the Duke of Lancaster, because the sovereign is always the Duke of Lancaster. She’s not the Duchess of Lancaster.
 
She is also the Duchess of Cornwall and prefers to use that title.
…and you mean she will be Queen of the United Kingdom.
 
Well, no wonder the US said no monarchy! Look at all the trouble it causes! Not to mention expense! I’m not willing to pay tax to support them! 😮
 
The royals also generate a lot of tourism revenue. And also voluntarily pay taxes on the large incomes from their various estates (incomes that have nothing to do with tax income). Prince Charles, for example, earns income as Duke of Cornwall… the Duchy being an estate that includes various business ventures.
 
twf said:
She is also the Duchess of Cornwall and prefers to use that title.
Click to expand...
Camilla? I identified her as the Duchess of Cornwall, but technically, she is also the Princess of Wales since Charles is the Prince.

And Elizabeth is Elizabeth II, Queen of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand and Head of the Commonwealth and Queen of Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, and Saint Kitts and Nevis.
 
twf said:
The royals also generate a lot of tourism revenue. And also voluntarily pay taxes on the large incomes from their various estates (incomes that have nothing to do with tax income). Prince Charles, for example, earns income as Duke of Cornwall… the Duchy being an estate that includes various business ventures.
Click to expand...
Well, when I lived in Leatherhead in Surrey, I knew a lot of people in West Norwood row houses (across from the cemetery), who wouldn’t agree that the monarchy earn their enormous salaries, tax or no tax. There is too much disparity between a Brixton milk factory worker, who works a lot harder than any “royal” and “the Princess Whoever” just because of an accident of birth or a quirk of marriage.

And I’m not being mean. I actually like Charles and Camilla and feel the Queen should have allowed him to marry her in the first place. Not doing so is what cost Diana her life and happiness, not that I blame the Queen. I blame failure to change, which is why I believe the Queen has been lenient with Harry. That, and he’ll never get close to the throne.

I feel bad for Charles, who has stated he wishes he had not been born royal, because he’s spent nearly 70 years training for a job he has yet to receive, and the only way he can receive it is if his mother dies! Horrible situation. And when he finally does get the job, the numbers dictate a short reign. It’s not a life I’d ever want, money and privilege or not.
 
Last edited:
No. To have his causa accepted, to have his marriage to Katherine declared null, for certain theological reasons. Unless you choose to apply a term commonly and currently meant today to mean a separation and termination of a marriage to the situation which was different in the 16th century. Hank wanted his marriage declared to not have happened, validly and sacramentally, due to its facing sacramental impediments (possibly diriment, possibly absolute).

Happened a lot back in the day.
 
Last edited:
Your neighbours in West Norwood were misinformed. The only member of the Royal Family to get anything like a salary is the Duke of Edinburgh, who gets a “parliamentary grant”. Part of the Royal Family expenses comes from a proportion of the Crown Estate, the rest from the hereditary and private wealth of the Queen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top