I’m pretty sure his title is HRH Skieurope of CC.
Camilla said today: “It’s nice to have something that is uplifting rather than depressing. Everything was just perfect, including the weather, which couldn’t have been better. It was a beautiful day.”
I think that sums it up for me. I enjoyed the wedding and this thread so much because they were uplifting diversions from the daily news of late.
Thank you for the explanation, @skieurope.
Too many posts to go through but I wouid like to mention that big fancy hats are a big deal at the Kentucky Derby and opening day at Saratoga. Hats as fancy as at British weddings
I don’t recall hat wearing at The Preakness but it’s been years since I went and I’ve never been to Belmont.
They wear hats there too.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/fashion-style/bal-preakness-2017-best-hats-20170516-photogallery.html
There too
https://www.foxsports.com/horse-racing/gallery/belmont-stakes-fans-and-fashion-060813
Neither is probably the same scale as the Kentucky Derby, though.
The title Princess Royal is customarily given to the eldest daughter of a British monarch. But only one princess can hold it at any given time - which is why Queen Elizabeth never held that title. Her Aunt Mary (George V’s eldest daughter) was still holding on to it.
With the new rules of succession to the throne that put male and female heirs on an equal footing, it will at some future point be interesting to see a Princess Royal ascending the throne ahead of her younger brother who is Prince of Wales. Or who knows, maybe they won’t make first sons Prince of Wales if they are not also heir apparent? In any case, given William’s and George’s young ages, I’ll never live to see how it shakes out.
With giving Prince Edward the title of Earl of Wessex and Harry the title of Duke of Sussex, I wonder whether the Queen is deliberately reviving or focusing on old Anglo-Saxon county or place names. Wessex = (the land of the) West Saxons and Sussex = South Saxons. She could still use Essex = East Saxons and Middlesex = Middle Saxons, but not Nosex. For centuries back in Anglo-Saxon times there were no North Saxons to speak of. The north was full of invading Danes - the “Danelaw.”
I doubt that she microanaylzed it to that extent. Rather, I think she picked a couple of choices off the shelf, dusted them off, and let Edward choose.
We may never know the real story, but it has been written that Edward chose the title after seeing Shakespeare in Love which had a fictional character named Lord Wessex, portrayed by Colin Firth.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/8196402/Royal-wedding-Prince-William-asks-the-Queen-not-to-make-him-a-duke.html
It’s already in use.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1492282/New-Earl-of-Essex-is-ever-so-humble.html
When I hear Wessex, I think of its famous King–Lear-- and then Thomas Hardy’s Wessex novels.
Lear was King of Britain. The most famous King of Wessex was a real person - Alfred the Great.
Just looked it up and you’re right, of course, but what my memory was dredging up was that Thomas Hardy connected Lear with Wessex, and I studied Hardy in Wessex with a prof who made the connection.
Perhaps this has been said already, but the Queen may have chosen the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex because the only previous Duke of Sussex was known for being against slavery.
If Charlette had been born first would she eventually have become Princess of Wales? Then if George was born second he could become Prince Royal after Charles and Anne died?
Yes to the first. (Trivia note, there was one a Princess of Wales in her own right, who was also a Charlotte. She was George IV’s only child, and as he was estranged from his wife there was no prospect of her being supplanted by a younger brother. She died young in childbirth, leading to her uncles marrying in a race to provide a new heir, one of those marriages being that of Queen Victoria’s parents.) I don’t think that they would do the latter though.
As I said before, I doubt that the Queen looked at it that way. Sussex was one of those titles speculated for William, so it’s been talked about for a while. It’s one of those fun parlor games to speculate, but we will never know the reason.
Actually, no to the first. Under the current rules, only a male heir can bear the title of Prince of Wales. Princess of Wales is only the wife of the Prince of Wales. That is why Elizabeth, while heir presumptive, was never Princess of Wales. Again, she (or any future monarch) can change the rules in the future.
Sorry, not correct. Charlotte was the Heir Presumptive to George IV and would have become Queen had she not predeceased her father, but her title was Princess Charlotte of Wales as her father at the time was Prince of Wales. It’s similar to how William and Harry were titled Prince William/Harry of Wales before their respective marriages. But she was never Princess of Wales.
Prince Royal does not exist as a title. Again, the monarch can always create one, but it’s moot in this case.
@skieurope , so when William and Harry were given dukedoms, they no longer have the “Wales” title at all?
If Harry has children while the queen lives, their kids are not HRH, correct? But if she dies and Charles is king, then they have kids, they then are HRH?
If the first scenario is correct, upon the queens death, can Charles make them HRH? Did I completely confuse you with my questions? Ha!
I think the queen may live longer than all of us! At 92 and she looks that good?! Those are some amazing genes, didn’t her mom live to be over 100? And while her husband didn’t look fabulously healthy at the wedding, he is 96 and walked in on his own 2 feet.
I wonder what kind of exercise regime she used when she was younger.
I saw a photo recently of the queen riding a pony. She has given up riding horses but still rides. She loves to walk also. She has the genes to live another 10 years.