Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex

He took the title of Earl of Wessex knowing he would get the title of Duke of Edinburgh upon his father's death. He also didn't want his children to have royal titles. It was a matter of choice.

He was the one who asked to be made Earl of Wessex, so the answer would be no, OP.

Yes, OP, he is extremely bitter about it. Do NOT bring it up around him.

His children are already entitled to the princess /prince title as the grandchildren of the monarch in the male line (no title for Anne's kids) . But Edward and Sophie didn't want them to use the titles . Now the question is if they gave the titles up for their children for good or if the kids could reclaim them if they feel like it .

Also: his children already ARE, legally, HRH the Princess Louise of Wessex and HRH the Princes James of Wessex, Viscount Severn: grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line are automatically made prince and princess legally. They are only [italic]styled[/italic] the Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor and the Lord James, Viscount of Wessex. They could certainly make a bid when they reach the age of legal majority (despite their parents' wishes) to be styled by their actual legal royal titles in the Court Circular.

Charles is against the family outside the direct line having royal titles, and since is soon to be regent (if not king), Edward saw which way the wind was blowing and tried to suck up to his brother by giving his children diminished titles. But no matter how he styles them, the law is the law. But it should be said the sovereign could at any time also withdraw the legal status of prince and princess for Louise and James (or any other grandchildren in the male line if s/he issued letters patent; all titles ultimately derive from the monarch, which is why George VI and Elizabeth II were able to deny the status of HRH to Wallis Simpson after she married Edward VIII, even though that was patently against precedent.

[quote] and since is soon to be regent (if not king),

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

What will be very interesting to see is whether Harry and Meghan will want the HRH title for their children or will also style them as Lords and Ladies.

Edward was trying to set a precedent when he styled his children without the HRH titles, and it's known that Charles would prefer this for heirs not in the direct line of inheritance. But if Meghan gets pregnant soon, and the queen does not abdicate or make Charles regent in the intervening nine months, the queen could allow for the children to be styled according to their HRH status if Harry wnats it and she accedes to his request (which she might do since she reportedly is very fond of him).

Seeing as he chose to reject prince and princess titles for his children, he's probably not too bitter.

R5, please note they are not "The Prince James of Wessex" or "The Princess Louise of Wessex." The use of the article (i.e., "the") is restricted to the monarch's children (before becoming Duke of York, Andrew was "The Prince Andrew") and the female monarch's husband ("The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh"). So, we have "Princess Beatrice of York" and "Prince Michael of Kent." You get the picture.

Queen Elizabeth would not have been a princess when her grandfather was alive, if Charles’ rule had been followed. That would be awkward for her to later become the monarch.

Are the rumors Edward being gay true? If so, did his gayness end after his theater days? Is Sophie a beard?

[quote] Queen Elizabeth would not have been a princess when her grandfather was alive, if Charles’ rule had been followed. That would be awkward for her to later become the monarch.

Elizabeth would have been made Princess, even under Charles's system, when her uncle relinquished the throne and her father inherited it.

England/the UK has had monarchs inherit the throne before who were not of the title of prince or princess their whole lives.

Both Mary Tudor and Elizabeth Tudor were born with the status of princess, and then had it stripped away from them when their father re-married. Then later they had the title restored to them again.

Mary II and Queen Anne were born with the titles "the Lady Mary" and "the Lady Anne." Mary then became princess of Orange, and then queen; Anne later became Princess of Denmark, and then Queen of the United Kingdom.

Will Charlotte’s eventual kids be styled Prince and Princess Noel’s that the succession law has changed? Or was this not covered?

That should be “now,” not “Noel’s.” Stupid autocorrect

All of the good Royal Dukedoms are already taken. Gloucester, Kent, York. Might as well take Edinburgh. Won’t be long now.

[quote] That should be “now,” not “Noel’s.”

Noel is the ultimate queen.

R4 Anne chose to not have titles for her children. It was surprising at the time but that was her wish. It wasn’t a case of “no titles for her”, she could have had prince/ princess if she wanted.

I mentioned it to him once and he flew into a hissy fit. Queened right out on me and was kinda scary.

Didn't we used to call Eddie Wessex Dockside Doris?

r7 if Sparks has a child in the next year or so, they will only be titled "Lord xx" or "Lady xx" by rule, as they are only great grandchildren of QEII even though royal. They will automatically be elevated to HRH Prince/Princess the minute the Queen dies and grandpa Charles becomes King. Its very doubtful Harry & Meghan will request any higher styling, since the kids will be Prince/Princess in a few years anyway.

Only George was entitled to "HRH Prince" status at his birth, as he was a great grandchild but direct heir. QEII put out special "letters patent" to make Charlotte and new baby Louis the same rank/titles as brother George, ostensibly to make things fair and no one feel 'lessened' in the same family. They were also by rule only entitled to "Lord/Lady" status for now.

Interestingly if Charles dies before his mother, and William becomes King directly after QEII's death, Harry's kids will never become HRH Prince/Princess and stay "Lord/Lady x", since they were never grandchildren of the monarch (only niece/nephew). William would have to issue letters patent to change that and my guess is, he wouldn't (you can disagree on that).

William's been pretty tight-lipped as to whether he wants the titles lessened (like his dad wants).

Pa.

Almost certainly if and when George and Louis marry they will be granted royal dukedoms, just as their father and their uncle were. Now that Sussex is taken, all the non-controversial ones are filled (there are a few open, like Clarence, which is supposedly cursed, and a few like Albany which no one is entirely sure is available or not, since it was taken away during WWI because its holder was too pro-German). But they can always create new royal dukedoms for them if they like.

Charlotte will likely never be given a royal dukedom. But when Anne dies, and Charlotte's father is made king, she will almost certainly become the Princess Royal.

Edward wasn't the first to refuse royal titles for his children, it was Anne.

Anne did not refuse titles. According to the Letters Patent issued by George the V, no progeny of a daughter of the monarch is an HRH or titled. Also, it’s Dockyard Doris for Edward.

[quote] Edward wasn't the first to refuse royal titles for his children, it was Anne.

Royal titles have never been given automatically for daughters of kings. Princess Margaret's children did not have royal titles; nor did her aunt, the Princess Royal and Countess of Harewood. Neither did any of Edward VII's daughters have children with royal british titles; neither did the children of Queen Victoria's daughters (and on and on backwards).

Okay, thanks, I didn't know that about Anne and other daughters of the monarchs.

Her first husband refused a title though, didn't he? (or have I mixed up every single thing I know about them)

r28 Anne's husband Mark Philipps was offered a title - most likely an Earldom - but turned it down. If he had accepted than his children would have been style similarly to Princess Margaret's children and Prince Edward's - the courtesy title of Viscount for the oldest son and the honorific Lady for the daughter and Lord for an additional sons. When Anne's son was born he was 5th in line to the throne and had no title other than "Master Peter Philipps"

Thanks, R29.

Will Princess Eugenie's fiance become an Earl when they get married?

I brought it up around him once, big mistake. A vicious face-slapping ensued.

I don’t see why r31. She’s not the child of the monarch, she’s the offspring of the 7th in line.

[quote]Elizabeth would have been made Princess, even under Charles's system, when her uncle relinquished the throne and her father inherited it.

I explicitly indicated that she would not have been a princess while her grandfather was alive. She would have not been a princess as a young child under Charles’ policy even though she later became the monarch.

What are you all going on about, "Charles's system" or policy? He's only talked about slimming the monarchy so focus and funding shifts to a closer core of Royals.I don't believe he's explicitly discussed styling changes of future royals. He hasn't changed anything as he's not monarch, so he can't issue Letters Patent like QEII can. The monarch is the source of all titles and honors.

The current Queen when born was HRH Princess Elizabeth of York, as her father was Duke of York and son of the monarch (much like Beatrice & Eugenie today). When her grandfather died that was still her title; when her uncle abdicated and her father made King, she immediately became HRH The Princess Elizabeth.

The royal dukedoms of both Kent and Gloucester, currently the grandsons of George V, will become non-royal dukedoms upon the death of the incumbent princes; their respective sons upon succeeding will no longer bear the style of prince, nor the HRH title.

OMG! Make it stop!

Wondering how many centuries ago a group of men got together to work out all these scenarios and create the rules.