One of the primary things that shows a member of the Royal Family’s status above an ordinary person is their title and style. The title is the part which precedes their name and the style is what determines how one addresses the royal. Royal titles haven’t always been as they are now. The title of Prince/Princess has meant different things over the years too!
It was during George I’s reign that the title of Prince began to mean something again. Before, the title was handed to many different people, included non-relations of the Royal Family. George I instituted calling his sons Princes with the style of Royal Highness, whilst grandchildren were princes with the style of just Highness. Royal Highness ranks higher than just Highness.
The style of HRH (Royal Highness) means His/Her Royal Highness and is prefixed to many Royal Titles, not just Prince/Princess. Control over the use of HRH and Prince/Princess was still, despite George I’s changes, rather relaxed and by the 20th century all kinds of relations of the Monarch were ‘entitled’ to the style of Prince/Princess.
It wasn’t until during WW1 that the then King, George V realised that such allowances for British titles could spell disaster for him and his family, he was essentially a German Monarch in Britain. In order to keep confidence with the British People and to not seem to be siding with the Germans, he restricted the right to the title of Prince/Princess in a special order in 1917, removing the right for his German relatives to bear the title.
This was known as the 1917 Letters Patent and is one of the most quoted letters patent by royal commentators. The exact order of the letters patent exclusively reserved the right of the title of Prince/Princess and the style of Royal Highness to ‘all children of the sovereign, all male-line grandchildren of the sovereign (children born to sons of the Monarch) and the son of the son of the Prince Of Wales.’ – the effect of this order is still felt today and in order to ensure Prince William’s child becomes a Prince/Princess, a special order by Her Majesty The Queen was instituted 2013 Letters Patent, granting the style of Royal Highness and Prince/Princess to all children of Prince William, regardless of gender. Had this not have happened, under the 1917 letters patent, the first son would be a Prince, but any other children would be Lords and Ladies.
Nowadays, the style of just Highness (His/Her Highness) is never used in the British Monarchy, instead, the style of Royal Highness is the only style used for descendants of the Monarch.
It is possible to hold the style of Royal Highness without being a Prince or Princess. Dukes, Duchesses, Earls, Countesses and more have all been given the style of HRH in the past without becoming Princes. A notable example of this would be when The Duke Of Edinburgh (then Philip Mountbatten) became engaged to the then Princess Elizabeth (now Queen Elizabeth II) in 1947. The King [George VI] granted the title of Duke Of Edinburgh and the style of Royal Highness to Philip who still bears the title to this day. He was made a Prince by Queen Elizabeth in 1956.
Equally, though there are no modern day examples, the title of Prince/Princess could also be held without the style of Royal Highness. The two are separable.
Wives of Princes and those with the style of Royal Highness can assume the female form of their husband’s title. For example, Prince William’s wife is officially, Her Royal Highness Princess William, Duchess Of Cambridge, where Prince William is His Royal Highness Prince William, Duke Of Cambridge.
There have also been instances where those entitled to the style of Royal Highness and title of Prince/Princess have been denied their title by special orders from Her Majesty. Prince Edward’s children, under the 1917 letters patent, should be styled as ‘His Royal Highness Prince James of Wessex’ and ‘Her Royal Highness Princess Louise of Wessex’, though in an attempt to remove some of the burdens associated with royal titles, Prince Edward and The Queen agreed that his children would be styled as children of an Earl. This was done by special letters patent.
Some people argue that this letters patent doesn’t carry enough force to override the 1917 letters patent and that Edward’s children are still Princes and Princesses. They are styled as James, Viscount Severn and The Lady Louise Windsor. There’s nothing stopping The Queen revoking this at a later time and allowing Prince Edward’s children to be princes and princesses.
With regard to James, Viscount Severn. where does the name Severn come from? I have looked but can’t find any answer. Thank you.
When Prince Edward (James’s father) was made Earl of Wessex in 1999, he was also made Viscount Severn (severn being a place in west-England), James uses the title as what’s known as a ‘courtesy title’. If Prince Edward didn’t hold the title of Viscount Severn, James would just be ‘The Honourable James Mountbatten-Windsor’!
In regards to the children of the Earl of Wessex, there were no “special letters patent” regarding their titles! Which is why, under the current LPs, they are actually Prince and Princess, despite not using those titles.
May I remind you that Her Majesty’s will, however expressed, is sufficient to cause orders to take place. Besides, even if they are technically princes and princesses, it’s not a style that is ever used, formally or otherwise, like with the Duchess Of Cornwall who is technically Princess Of Wales.
My point was that there were no “special Letters Patent” issued as is suggested in the article. It was stated in a press release from Buckingham Palace.
Ok. So help me out here – why have the Duke of York’s children got the HRH Princess titles?
Because they’re children of a son of the Monarch. If they were children of a daughter of the Monarch (like Zara Phillips & Peter Phillips), they’d have no title.
To receive the latest Royal Central posts straight to your email inbox, enter your email address below and press subscribe.
Join 564 other subscribers