Today it was announced that His Royal Highness, Prince Harry and Ms. Meghan Markle are engaged. Watch this interview with the couple, filmed this afternoon at Kensington Palace.
The official announcement was made this morning by The Prince of Wales, who later said he and The Duchess of Cornwall were thrilled with the news.
The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh are delighted for the couple and also wish them every happiness.
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge said of the engagement: “We are very excited for Harry and Meghan. It has been wonderful getting to know Meghan and to see how happy she and Harry are together.”
Find out more about the announcement here: http://bit.ly/2zJaMpg
In the majority monarchies a new monarch generally retains his given name upon succession. However, there are times when a monarch either changes his or her name completely or shortens the name they will be known by during their reign. For example, Emperor Friedrich III of Germany (1888), was known as Fritz to his family, and was officially known to the public as Friedrich-Wilhelm while he was Crown Prince.
In the English/British monarchy changing names has been a recent development and even then there are only a few example. Up until the time of William IV of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, King of Hanover, I cannot find any King or Queen of England that changed their name when they wore the crown. There was one King of Scotland that did change his name. King Robert III of Scotland (1390-1406) was born with the name John. One month after his accession in April of 1390 the Scottish Parliament granted John permission to change his regnal name to Robert, to maintain the link back to Robert I the Bruce but also to disassociate himself from the unpopular and disastrous reign of King John Balliol.
When King George IV of the United Kingdom died in 1830 his brother, The Duke of Clarence, christened Prince William-Henry, wanted to call himself King Henry IX until it was pointed out to him that the Scottish Pretender, Henry Stuart, Cardinal Duke of York, also claimed to be Henry IX by himself and his supporters. Given that Henry Stuart died 30 years prior and many still remembered him the King was persuaded to be known by his first name, William.
King William IV’s niece, Queen Victoria, was christened with the double name Alexandrina-Victoria and was known as Drina within the family during her youth. The day she became queen she was actually proclaimed Queen Alexandrina-Victoria of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. However, the next day she let it be known that she simply wanted to be called Victoria.
In homage to her sainted husband, Prince Albert,* Queen Victoria named her son, the Prince of Wales, Albert-Edward in hopes that he would become King Albert I of the United Kingdom. That did not happen and in an effort to forge his own identity he chose to reign as King Edward VII. Up until he succeeded his mother the Prince of Wales was known as Bertie within the family. Albert-Edward’s eldest son was christened Albert Victor Christian Edward and was known as Eddy within the family. Albert-Victor died of pneumonia in 1892 and never assumed the crown. Since he was known as Eddy within the family it is logical to concluded that had he lived he would have become King Edward VIII.
The next name change we find is with Queen Mary, the wife of King George V. Queen Mary was christened HSH Princess Victoria-Mary of Teck and known as May within the family, had to choose her regnal name when her husband came to the throne in 1910. As Princess of Wales she was known by her double name Victoria-Mary and since George V detested double names he told his wife to choose between which two she wanted be known by. She believed that to be called Queen Victoria was out of the question seeing that it was only 9 years ago that the great queen had passed, so the obvious choice was Queen Mary.
The son of King George V and Queen Mary, King Edward VIII, was christened Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David and although he was known as David within the family, his official public name was Edward and so when he became King Edward VIII for a short period in 1936 it cannot be considered a name change. However, his brother and next-in-line to the throne, Prince Albert The Duke of York, and known as Bertie in the family, did change his regnal name to George VI in order to show continuity with his father George V after the scandalous abdication crisis. It is understandable then, given this short tradition of name changes, to question the new Queen Elizabeth II in 1952 to ascertain what name she wanted to reign under. Without a question she chose her own name.
For years there have been rumors flying around that when the current Prince of Wales comes to the throne instead of being known as King Charles III he will be known as King George VII. The rumor is that King Charles I and II are unpopular and associated with bad reigns and it is well known that the Prince of Wales holds a great affection and admiration for his ancestor, King George III. First off, I do not put much faith in this rumor and I do not think King Charles II had such a bad reign or negative connotations are associated with him. However, if the Prince of Wales does choose to reign under a different name there is some precedence for it.
- Speaking of Prince Albert, the Prince Consort, his first name was actually Franz (Francis) and Albert was one of his many names. He was christened HSH Prince Francis Albert Augustus Charles Emmanuel of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.
Taken earlier this year! Not sure who took this picture but it is wonderful! Wonderful picture of HM the Queen with HRH The Prince of Wales!
EDIT: Info from my friend Karen. The photo was taken by photographer Nick Knight back in May, in the White Drawing Room at Windsor Castle before the night of the celebrations at the Royal Windsor Horse Show.
One of the things I enjoy about the history of royalty is when I can connect todays royal family to the Victorian Era. On this date Prince Charles of Edinburgh (future Prince of Wales) was Baptized. The Prince of Wales was baptized in the Music Room of Buckingham Palace on 15 December 1948. At his birth on 14 November 1948, Charles was the first child of HRH Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh (later Queen Elizabeth II), and HRH Philip, The Duke of Edinburgh, and the first grandchild of King George VI and Queen Elizabeth of the UK.
In the back row of this photograph are: (left to right) Patricia Mountbatten, the Lady Brabourne, HRH The Duke of Edinburgh, HM King George VI, the Hon David Bowes-Lyon (his maternal great-uncle), HG Alexander Cambridge, Earl of Athlone, brother of Queen Mary, who stood proxy for King Haakon VII of Norway.
In the front: (left to right) Victoria Mountbatten, the Dowager Marchioness of Milford Haven (his paternal great-grandmother), who was born HGDH Princess Victoria of Hesse and by Rhine, the eldest daughter of Grand Duke Ludwig IV of Hesse and by Rhine and his wife Princess Alice of the United Kingdom (second daughter of Queen Victoria), HRH Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh (holding Prince Charles) Queen Mary, Princess Margaret.
Pictured below. HGDH Princess Victoria of Hesse and by Rhine, paternal great-grandmother of HRH The Prince of Wales.
Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of Scotland, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Prince Andrew, Prince Charles, Prince Edward, Prince Philip, Princess Anne, Queen Elizabeth II, the Duke of York, The Earl of Wessex, the prince of Wales, The Princess Royal
Today will begin a new series on how the line of succession has changed over the years. I will pick random and important dates and will examine who was in line for the throne at that time. Although my main focus will be the British line of succession I will also include other monarchies from time to time. Although this is a new series I won’t be doing it week-to-week, it will reoccur randomly.
At first there was just four. It was mid 1977 when I began to research the royal family and the Kings and Queens of Britain. At that time there were just four descendants of HM. The Queen and HRH The Duke of Edinburgh. These four were also the top four in line to the succession to the throne:
1. HRH The Prince of Wales
2. HRH The Prince Andrew
3. HRH The Prince Edward
4. HRH The Princess Anne
Except for the Prince Charles, none of the Queen’s children had any titles yet. Princess Anne would not be given her title, The Princess Royal, until ten years later in 1987. Prince Andrew and Prince Edward would not be given their titles until they married. In 1977 the Queen had been on the throne 25 years and it was also the year of her Silver Jubilee. Her Majesty was 51 years old (the same age as I am now) and would be a first time grandmother that November when Princess Anne would give birth to her first child Peter Philips.
Flash forward 38 years and a lot has changed! Her Majesty is now 89 and has celebrated her Golden Jubilee celebrating 50 years on the throne in 2002 and her Diamond Jubilee in 2012 celebrating 60 years on the throne. This September The Queen will be on the throne one day longer than Queen Victoria and will be come Britain’s longest reigning monarch at 63 years, 217 days. Instead of her descendents occupying the first four places in the succession they now occupy the first 17 places in line for the succession! Here they are in order.
1. HRH The Prince of Wales
2. HRH The Duke of Cambridge
3. HRH Prince George of Cambridge
4. HRH Princess Charlotte of Cambridge
5. HRH Prince Henry of Wales
6. HRH The Duke of York
7. HRH Princess Beatrice of York
8. HRH Princess Eugenie of York
9. HRH The Earl of Wessex
10. Lord Severn
11. Lady Louise Windsor
12. HRH The Princess Royal
13. Peter Philips
14. Savannah Phillips
15. Isla Phillips
16. Zara Tindall
17. Mia Tindall
It is very interesting to see how the line of succession changes over the years. It is fascinating to compare today’s line of succession to February, 1952 just prior to the death of HM King George VI.
1. HRH The Prince Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh
2. HRH Prince Charles of Edinburgh
3. HRH Princess Anne of Edinburgh
4. HRH The Princess Margaret
5. HRH The Duke of Gloucester (Prince Henry)
6. HRH Prince William of Gloucester
7. HRH Prince Richard of Gloucester
8. HRH The Duke of Kent (Prince Edward)
9. HRH Prince Michael of Kent
10. HRH Princess Alexandra of Kent
11. The Princess Royal, Mary, Countess of Harewood
12. The Rt Hon The Earl of Harewood
13. David Viscount Lascelles
14. Gerald Lascelles
15. HH Princess Alexandra, 2nd Duchess of Fife
16. James Carnegie, 3rd Duke of Fife
17. HM King Olav V of Norway
Today, 63 years later only the top two remain in the top twenty inline for the throne. The Prince of Wales (HRH Prince Charles of Edinburgh at the time) moved up one place and has remained. His sister, The Princess Royal (HRH Princess Anne of Edinburgh at the time) has gone from 3 (she was actually at number 2 until the birth of the Duke of York in 1960) to number 12. The next living member on the list is number 7, HRH Prince Richard of Gloucester, the current HRH The Duke of Gloucester who moved to his current 24th inline to the throne. Incidentally, the Duke of Gloucester is the youngest grandchild of King George V and Queen Mary. He is the first inline to the throne who is not descended from King George VI. He is also the senior male line descendant of Queen Victoria.
Constitutional Monarchy, Diana, Duke of Edinburgh, Elizabeth II, George III, George IV, King George V of Great Britain, Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana of Cambridge, Princess Charlotte of Cambridge, Princess of Wales, The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, the prince of Wales
Some interesting facts about the new Princess Charlotte of Cambridge and the history of the name in the Biritish Royal Family.
Princess Charlotte is 4th in line to the throne after her grandfather, The Prince of Wales, her father, the Duke of Cambridge, and her brother Prince George of Cambridge. Should she have a younger brother he will not supplant her in the line of succession due to the change in succession laws. She is the first female in line to the throne. She will only be supplanted in the succession if and when her brother Prince Gorge of Cambridge has children in the future. God forbid anything happening to Prince George of Cambridge, but if it did Charlotte would become her father’s heir and eventually Queen Regnant. This would happen even if Charlotte were to have younger brothers.
She is the first Princess of Cambridge born since 1833 when HRH Princess Mary-Adelaide of Cambridge (1833-1897) was born. Princess Mary-Adelaide of Cambridge was the daughter of HRH Prince Adolphus-Frederick, Duke of Cambridge (1774-1850) (7th son of King George III) and HSH Princess Augusta of Hesse-Cassel (1797-1889). Princess Mary-Adelaide of Cambridge was a first cousin of Queen Victoria and married Francis, Duke of Teck (1837-1900) in 1866. Their daughter, Mary of Teck (1867-1953) married the future King George V of the United Kingdom 1893 making her the grandmother of Queen Elizabeth II. This means that Princess Mary-Adelaide of Cambridge is the great-great-great-great grandmother of the newest Princess of Cambridge, Princess Charlotte of Cambridge.
There have been other Princesses named Charlotte in the Royal Family. First of all there was Queen Charlotte (1744-1818) wife of King George III of the United Kingdom. Queen Charlote was born HSH Princess Sophia-Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz and daughter of Duke Carl-Ludwig of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (1708-1752) and HSH Princess Elizabeth of Saxe-Hildburghausen (1713-1761). It has been said that Queen Mary resembled her great-grandmother Queen Charlotte and that in turn, Queen Elizabeth II resembles Queen Mary and conversely, Queen Charlotte.
The eldest daughter of King George III and Queen Charlotte was HRH The Princess Charlotte, The Princess Royal (1762-1828). In the future she would marry King Friedrich of Würrtemberg (1754-1816) as his second wife. This is the same royal dynasty that produced Francis, Duke of Teck.
King George III’s eldest son, the future George IV (1761-1820), had only one daughter, Princess Charlotte of Wales (1796-1817) from his disastrous marriage with his cousin Princess Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel. In 1817 Charlotte married HSH Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld. Sadly, Princess Charlotte of Wales never lived to succeed her father as Queen. She died in childbirth in 1817. Her husband went on to be elected King of the Belgians in 1831.
Another aspect of the birth of Princess Charlotte of Cambridge is that everyone in line after her takes one step back in the sucession. Princess Charlotte’s uncle, Prince Harry of Wales, is now 5th in line to throne. He was born 3rd in line. But who it affects most is Princess Beatrice of York who falls beck to 7th in line to the throne. Under the new laws of succession only the first 6 in line to the throne have to seek permission of the Sovereign to marry. This means that Princess Beatrice of York does not have to ask the Queen permission to marry. Should the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have another child this would push the Duke of York to 7th inline to the throne meaning he would no longer need his mother’s permission to marry once again.
Lastly, The Duke of Cambridge’s uncle, The Earl Spencer, has a two year old daughter named Lady Charlotte Diana Spencer. So the name Charlotte has a strong history behind it!
It has been 10 years since the Prince of Wales married Camilla Parker-Bowles at Windsor Guildhall. After 10 years the marriage seems as strong as ever and I personally think that HRH The Duchess of Cornwall is an excellent companion and spouse for her husband. This marriage was not without controversy and many were not only against this marriage they are against the Duchess of Cornwall becoming queen upon the succession to the throne by the Prince of Wales.
Although the Duchess of Cornwall is legally the Princess of Wales it is a title she doesn’t use out of deference to the late Diana, Princess of Wales. Clarence House announced at the time of the marriage that when the Prince of Wales becomes king the Duchess of Cornwall will be called HRH The Princess Consort instead of Queen. Now the truth is the Duchess will legally be Queen and that it will take an Act of Parliament to remove the title Queen from the Duchess. Despite a growing attitude that more people want the Duchess to be queen it still seems like a controversial topic.
I am an American and most of my observation on this topic comes from social media. I belong to several groups and pages dedicated to royalty (I even run one myself) and this is still a hot topic for both sides. There seems to be an equal mix of those that support the Duchess and those that…well, there is no other way to put it….they hate her! The hatred comes from what I call overzealous Diana supporters. The sad thing to me about all of this is the fact that it has been eighteen years since Diana, Princess of Wales died and there are some who have not, or will not, let go of their hatred. I just don’t think holding onto that much anger or resentment is healthy. My thought is, if Diana had lived she would have forgiven the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall and moved on with her life, possibly even remarried. So I wonder why those that still love and support her do not let go of their anger like she would have?
Her sons, The Duke of Cambridge and Prince Henry of Wales, have accepted the Duchess of Cornwall as have Her Majesty the Queen and HRH The Duke of Edinburgh and the rest of the royal family. They all know her more intimately than any of us, so I trust their judgment. From all accounts that I have read the Duchess of Cornwall is a kind and caring woman. She is much better suited for the Prince of Wales than Diana was. That is a sad truth and that takes nothing away from the good heart and loving caring ways in which Diana, Princess of Wales lived her life. I also loved and admired Diana, Princess of Wales and that leads me to my closing point.
There is enough love to go around for both of them. In my life one of the things that gives me meaning is seeking healing. I long for people to heal on the inside and I long to help heal the discord between people. A lot of time has passed and it is time to heal the rift between those that support the Duchess of Cornwall and those that still remember fondly Diana, Princess of Wales. For me the bigger picture is the future of the monarchy. And as I said at the conclusion of my series, Survival of Monarchies, the monarch rules by the will of the people and if the divide continues and is very vocal it could have a negative affect on the monarchy.
The Duchess of Cornwall is a great support for the Prince of Wales and I think she has shown herself to be an important member of the royal family. It is time to heal and let us all show support for the entire royal family and be grateful they are still around providing welcome service to their country. Here is wishing the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall a happy tenth wedding anniversary and praying for more happy years to come!
Camilla Parker Bowles, James, Lady Louise Windsor, Louise of Wessex, Prince Charles, Prince James of Wessex, Queen Elizabeth II, The Duchess of Cornwall, The Earl of Wessex, the prince of Wales, Viscount Severn
This is a controversial topic. When The Prince of Wales married the present Duchess of Cornwall in April of 2005 it was decided that instead of being called HRH The Princess of Wales (a title that is legally hers) she would instead use one of the Prince of Wales’ other titles, Duke of Cornwall, and that she would be known as the Duchess of Cornwall. It was also announced at the time that when Charles becomes king the Duchess of Cornwall will beknown as HRH The Princess Consort instead of Her Majesty the Queen.
There has been great debate whether or not Her Majesty the Queen needs to issue new letters patent for these titles to be legal. Some argue that as the Font of all Honours the queen’s word is just as legally binding as any official decree or letters patent. Camilla is the Princess of Wales even though she does not use that title. However, I have read that in the situation with the Duchess of Cornwall not being queen when her husband becomes king, it would actually take and Act of Parliament to strip her of her title. This is something I do not think will be done.
It seems as if the queen is doing the same thing with the Duchess of Cornwall that was done with the Children of TRH The Earl and Countess of Wessex. Allowing her to use a lesser title despite legally holding a higher title. The children of The Earl and Countess of Wessex are legally entitled, per the 1917 Letters Patent issued by King George V, to be styled and titled HRH Prince or Princess of Great Britain as grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line. In this case their eldest daughter is HRH Princess Louise of Wessex and their son is HRH Prince James of Wessex. These titles have not been legally stripped from them, it was simply announced they just would not use their royal styles and titles.
Therefore, despite the agreement made when the Prince of Wales married the Duchess of Cornwall she will, in fact, be Queen of the United Kingdom when her husband becomes king, she just will not use that title. The question I am asking is should she be allowed to be called queen, her rightful title?
I have mixed feelings on the subject. On the one hand I say yes. I think the Duchess of Cornwall has led a fine example of being a supportive consort to the Prince of Wales and would make an excellent Queen Consort. On the other hand I also know that constitutional monarchies need the support of the people. From my understanding is that although the Duchess of Cornwall has risen greatly in poularity since her marriage to the Prince of Wales there is still considerable objections by a number of people who do not support the Duchess of Cornwall becoming queen. So in this instance, despite my feelings, I need to bow to public opinion as it is today. Will that opinion change? I certainly hope so. I still think there is enough time for the Duchess of Cornwall to win over the hearts of the people and to take her righful position by her husbands side on the throne.
Buckingham Palace, Duchess of Cambridge, Elizabeth II, England, Kaiser Wilhelm I of Germany, Kaiser Wilhelm II, King James III of England, King Louis XIV of France and Navarre, King Louis XV of France, Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of Scotland, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Queen Victoria, The Duke of Cambridge, the prince of Wales, Wilhelm II of Germany, Winston Churchill
Yesterday was an historic moment. The Duchess of Cambridge gave birth to a royal prince yesterday. This was the first time since Queen Victoria had three direct heirs to the throne. First in line was The Prince of Wales (Edward VII), then came her grandson The Duke of York (George V) and her great-grandson Prince Edward of York (Edward VIII). Queen Victoria actually lived to see George VI, Edward VIII’s brother, but there are not any pictures of her with her son, grandson and both great-grandsons.
There has not been too many monarchs who have lived to see an heir in the third generation. Louis XIV of France and Navarre was one such monarch. He lived to see his great-grandchildren. However, he also outlived most of them and his successor, Louis XV, was one of his great-grandchildren. Wilhelm I, German Emperor & King of Prussia also lived to see three generations of successors. In 1882 his grandson, Prince Wilhelm, future German Emperor Wilhelm II, gave birth to the future Crown Prince Wilhelm. Sadly, Crown Prince Wilhelm was not able to inherit the Royal and Imperial thrones due to the monarchy in Germany being abolished in 1918 at the end of World War I.
It seemed like we waited for a long time for the Duchess of Cambridge to give birth to the new little prince. Now the wait begins to see what the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will name the future King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
So what will the name be? George and James seem to be popular choices right now. Both names have historical precedence in British history. George is the name Elizabeth II’s father chose to reign under, although he was named Albert after having the bad luck of being born on December 14, 1895, the 34 anniversary of the death of his great-grandfather, Prince Albert, the Prince Consort, husband of Queen Victoria. James is the name of Catherine’s brother (as well as the Duke of Cambridge’s cousin, James Viscount Severn, son of Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex).
If the name James is chosen we will see if Winston Churchill’s suggestion that the highest ordinal between England and Scotland should be used. When England and Scotland shared a monarch they used an ordinal, or regnal number, for both crowns. For example, James VI of Scotland was also James I of England. His grandson was James VII of Scotland and James II of England. This is the only name affected. When Charles I came to both the English and Scottish thrones neither England or Scotland had had a king by that name before. William III of England was William II of Scotland. His wife, Mary II, was also Mary II of England and Scotland, with Mary Stuart being the first queen named Mary in Scotland and Mary Tudor being the first queen named Mary in England.
When the countries were united in 1707 the monarchs were settled in England and Scotland was often ignored by the monarchs. They have followed the English system of numbering kings. The first thee kings of the House of Hanover did not have a problem with their regnal number since neither England or Scotland had kings named George before. There seems to be no controversy in Scotland with William IV and his regnal umber. The first time we begin to see some conflict is with the reigns of both Edward VII and Edward VIII. In Scotland there were times thier regnal numbers were omitted even in the Scottish Church. This issue did become more prominent with the reign of Elizabeth II. Since Elizabeth I of England never ruled over Scotland many in Scotland did not think she should be called Elizabeth II in Scotland. Many things such as mailboxes carrying the II in the royal cypher were defaced or destroyed. This is what prompted Winston Churchill to offer the solution that he did.
If the new baby prince is named James he will be called James VIII of the United Kingdom of Great Britain instead of James III. The name also carries a little controversy seeing that the pretender to the throne, James Francis, son of deposed king James II-VII of England and Scotland was also called James III-VIII by himself and his supporters. But that was centuries ago I am sure there wouldn’t be a problem now. It also follows that if the prince is named Richard, he will be Richard IV since there was not one named Richard who was king of Scotland. However, if he is named Robert or Alexander he would be Robert IV or Alexander IV since there have been three kings of Scotland with that name respectively.
Although we cannot predict the future the new little prince will not sit on the throne for a very long long time. Her Majesty the Queen is still going strong at the age of 87. Her son, the Prince of Wales is also healthy at the age of 64 and at the age of 31 the Duke of Cambridge will also likely see a long life. So it is possible that the new royal prince will not sit on the throne until he is in his 50s or 60s.
It will be interesting to see what the new baby will be named. Whatever the name shall be I wish the new baby prince a long healthy and happy life!