No she lost her HRH when she got divorced so was no longer Princess DianaCould she " just" have been styled Princess Diana without any extra title provided she had not remarried?
No, because she isn’t and never was Princess Diana - that was a tabloid construct. The only people who can style themselves Princess before their name are the royal born … so Alexandra, Anne, Beatrice, Eugenie, Charlotte and Lilibet. All Diana (and Kate’s) stylings come from their husband. If Diana or Kate are styled Princess before a forename, the the foreman’s is that of Charles or William (in the same way it’s Princess Michael of Kent).Could she " just" have been styled Princess Diana without any extra title provided she had not remarried?
---
Thank you for this link..I've ordered the mug as a keepsake. May be worth something in a hundred years!corrination
Yup, Queen Elizabeth actually had to create Philip a Prince of the United Kingdom. He gave up his original title of Prince of Greece and Denmark while George VI made him HRH The Duke of Edinburgh but not a Prince.No, because she isn’t and never was Princess Diana - that was a tabloid construct. The only people who can style themselves Princess before their name are the royal born … so Alexandra, Anne, Beatrice, Eugenie, Charlotte and Lilibet. All Diana (and Kate’s) stylings come from their husband. If Diana or Kate are styled Princess before a forename, the the foreman’s is that of Charles or William (in the same way it’s Princess Michael of Kent).
corrination
They aren’t the easiest things in the world to get a handle on - not helped by the fact the tabloids mis-style people as well. Basically if you go with the thought that females who marry in get nothing in their own right and for bloodline females it’s not that much better then you‘re about there.Thanks for all the info and sorry for not being clued up about royal titles!
It's much the same for any married woman - remember the slight hoohah when the Palace announced that Mrs Michael Tindall had had a baby (think it was Lena)? You only get your own first name if you're divorced technically.They aren’t the easiest things in the world to get a handle on - not helped by the fact the tabloids mis-style people as well. Basically if you go with the thought that females who marry in get nothing in their own right and for bloodline females it’s not that much better then you‘re about there.
I wonder how they will eventually take account of same sex marriages? It’s got to happen somewhere across the various families.It's much the same for any married woman - remember the slight hoohah when the Palace announced that Mrs Michael Tindall had had a baby (think it was Lena)? You only get your own first name if you're divorced technically.
The confusion with titles isn't helped by all other royal families making married-in spouses Prince and Princess in their own right - eg, Prince Daniel and Princess Sofia of Sweden, Princess Laurentien of the Netherlands and Princess Mabel of Orange-Nassau, Princess Claire of Belgium, Princess Marie of Denmark, Princess Claire of Luxembourg, the various Lichtenstein daughters in law (including Princess Angela, the first black European princess), etc.
Trust the BRF to be stuffier about titles.
The most ridiculous thing about his speech was that The Windsor’s are William and Harry’s blood family too!It was immediately obvious not long after Diana died that Earl Spencer was a bit of a cad but I remember the standing ovation he got at Diana's funeral after his soundbite speech.
"She would want us today to pledge ourselves to protecting her beloved boys William and Harry from a similar fate and I do this here Diana on your behalf. We will not allow them to suffer the anguish that used regularly to drive you to tearful despair.
And beyond that, on behalf of your mother and sisters, I pledge that we, your blood family, will do all we can to continue the imaginative and loving way in which you were steering these two exceptional young men so that their souls are not simply immersed by duty and tradition, but can sing openly as you planned."
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he never saw them again after that day. It was telling that Harry involved his Mother's sisters in Archie's birth announcement and Christening photos and not her brother.
King Charles III, HMTQ and Prince Philip were all nowhere near equipped to meet the emotional needs of both Diana and Harry but I bet they tried a damn sight harder to do it than he did.
Being similar age to H&W I feel so sorry for the hysteria they were exposed to when their Mother died.The most ridiculous thing about his speech was that The Windsor’s are William and Harry’s blood family too!
He’s directing that comment to Diana, not William and Harry. So it does make sense. He’s still a giant twat though.The most ridiculous thing about his speech was that The Windsor’s are William and Harry’s blood family too!
Yeah I’m super curious about what will happen here too. Surely it’s happened already in the aristocracy with hereditary titles?I wonder how they will eventually take account of same sex marriages? It’s got to happen somewhere across the various families.
He reminded me of a medieval baron challenging his monarch. He got away with it because the Spencers are a senior aristocratic family with more British royal blood in their veins than the Windsors who hail from a minor German aristocratic family.I have heard that many British aristocrats look down their noses at our German Royal family.Earl Spencer did his speech and walked away having nothing to do with his nephews because all he cared about was the attention and ovation he got. The man abandoned his own family, why would he care about his nephews? The eulogy was all about him.
I agree though on the day he was perceived by many as a hero which fed his huge ego.Earl Spencer did his speech and walked away having nothing to do with his nephews because all he cared about was the attention and ovation he got. The man abandoned his own family, why would he care about his nephews? The eulogy was all about him.
I've wondered this, what if George wants a husband rather than a wife down the line?I wonder how they will eventually take account of same sex marriages? It’s got to happen somewhere across the various families.
I saw some headline saying dukes are put out at not being invited to the coronation as they usually are. Could be a giant fuck you from Charles maybe?He reminded me of a medieval baron challenging his monarch. He got away with it because the Spencers are a senior aristocratic family with more British royal blood in their veins than the Windsors who hail from a minor German aristocratic family.I have heard that many British aristocrats look down their noses at our German Royal family.
---
I agree though on the day he was perceived by many as a hero which fed his huge ego.
His best friend at school was Boris Johnson. Says it all. Peas in a pod. They’ll both say with great conviction whatever sounds best in the moment without any intention of doing any of the work needed to carry it out. I remember being reduced to tears with Earl Spencer’s speech; fortunately I was older and wiser by the time his mate appeared and was never for second taken in that time thankfully.Earl Spencer did his speech and walked away having nothing to do with his nephews because all he cared about was the attention and ovation he got. The man abandoned his own family, why would he care about his nephews? The eulogy was all about him.
She could have gone retro and been My Lady the Kings Mother in the style of Margaret BeaufortWhich would have been wrong on just about every level.you could think of.
Firstly because the Queen part of Queen Mother comes from the title of the actual mother, who will then also be Queen Dowager (Queen Mary was Queen Mother twice) not the fact it’s a daughter who is Queen. I guess because the longest serving Dowager Queen who was known as Queen Mother did have a daughter as Queen, the meaning became blurred (Also when the Queen came to throne Queen Mary was still alive and Queen Dowager, so calling her mother Queen Mother differentiated between the Old Queen and the potentially 2 Queen Elizabeths. I think you have to go back a long way to find another time when there were 3 overlapping Queens)
So, if Diana was to be known as anything it would be Queen Mother, because King Mother as a designation doesn’t actually exist … which she couldn’t be because she would not actually have been Queen.
She would just have remained Diana, Princess of Wales unless she remarried or unless William reinstated the HRH and/or she was given a title in her own right.
That would have been cool! Margaret Beaufort was never a Queen Consort was she? She sounded terrifying to me.She could have gone retro and been My Lady the Kings Mother in the style of Margaret Beaufort
Today's royals are direct decedents of the tudors. Charles is 12x great grandson of Mary Queen of Scots and so 15x great grandson of King Henry 7.He reminded me of a medieval baron challenging his monarch. He got away with it because the Spencers are a senior aristocratic family with more British royal blood in their veins than the Windsors who hail from a minor German aristocratic family.I have heard that many British aristocrats look down their noses at our German Royal family.
---
I agree though on the day he was perceived by many as a hero which fed his huge ego.
No, she was never married to the King. Her son Henry 7th was distantly related to the royals and so when he won at the Battle of Bosworth, he then married the daughter of the previous King Edward 4th to strengthen his claim to the throne.That would have been cool! Margaret Beaufort was never a Queen Consort was she? She sounded terrifying to me.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?