A few weeks ago, there was a minor kerfuffle that quickly turned into a major royal kerfuffle. Prince William had filled out his newborn son’s birth certificate, and William identified Kate (HRH Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge) as “Princess of the United Kingdom”. Considering that St. James Palace and Buckingham Palace had always insisted that Kate was in fact NOT a princess up until that point, there were a lot of aggravated royal reporters and royal reporters. My explanation seemed to be the reasoning used by the Palace – Kate is a “princess” in the sense that she can adopt William’s title and become Princess William of Wales. At the end of the day, of course it does not matter at all. But now the royal reporters – one in particular – are having some kind of meltdown.
Richard Palmer of The Daily Express has written a column which I think qualifies as a “screed”. You can read the whole epic-ness here. His basic thesis is that Buckingham Palace and St. James Palace actively lied about Kate’s royal titles for the past few years, and that Buckingham Palace should apologize about it. Some highlights:
Buckingham Palace says it has known since the royal wedding that Kate is a princess but refuses to explain why it spent two years insisting she wasn’t. I’ll set out now what the palace says, as this is still a point causing confusion amongst readers, then I’ll explain why I believe the last sentence of this official response from the Queen’s office is highly misleading, if not downright untrue, following my earlier story about how Prince William surprised the world by describing his wife’s occupation as Princess of the United Kingdom.
When he did so, it made headlines around the world because for two years the UK and international media had been told she wasn’t a princess. Challenged by the Daily Express, Buckingham Palace promised to look into it.
In its response, the palace now says this: “Upon marriage to HRH Prince William of Wales, Catherine Middleton was entitled to use the name of her husband, Princess William of Wales, as the wife of a Royal Prince. On the occasion of their wedding, the Queen conferred on Prince William the title of HRH the Duke Cambridge and the couple became known as TRHs the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. So the Duchess of Cambridge has since her wedding day been a princess, and it was for this reason that “Princess of the United Kingdom” was noted on the registration of her son, Prince George of Cambridge. This has been the understanding of Buckingham Palace from the outset. We will not be commenting further on this matter.”
It’s that last sentence that troubles me. Because on April 29, 2011, the day of the royal wedding, a team of press officers acting for Buckingham Palace, Clarence House, and St. James’s Palace briefed the world’s media outside Westminster Abbey and Buckingham Palace that, as a royal duchess, Kate was not a princess. Incredulous reporters from around the world asked: “But surely the wife of a prince is a princess, whatever other titles she has? “Apparently not. It’s not as simple as that,” the press officers said in turn. “The wife of a prince doesn’t automatically become a princess if she’s given another title.”
They said this was the advice they had received from the Queen’s office at Buckingham Palace. And as the Queen is what is known as the Fount of Honour, she is the final arbiter on these things. But in the days following the wedding this view was challenged by some veteran royal watchers who insisted that, although a royal duchess title is a more senior title than plain old Princess William, Kate had the right to use both and enjoyed the rank of a Princess. When I went back to William and Kate’s press office, other authorities, and a couple of the press officers I had spoken to on royal wedding day, there was a swift passing of the buck: the information had come from Buckingham Palace and I should speak to them because they were the authority on this, I was told.
So three times I did speak to a spokesman for the Queen, who assured me with growing exasperation that all those royal watchers were wrong and the Duchess of Cambridge was in no way, shape or form a princess. He also insisted that, contrary to what they claimed, the Queen Mother, Countess of Wessex, and Sarah, Duchess of York had never been princesses either.
He was wrong, plain wrong, I now realise. But faced with conflicting claims, I chose to go with what I was told was the ultimate authority on these matters: someone speaking on behalf of the Queen. Had the press officers been told what to say to stop the press christening her Princess Kate, did a private secretary give incorrect information to the press officers, or had they simply miscontrued? Buckingham Palace won’t say.
…The person I spoke to most about all of this is actually one of the most helpful people on royal history and ceremony and I don’t want to see him scapegoated for the palace’s collective failure. I just want Buckingham Palace as an instituton to apologise and say: sorry, we got it wrong. We all make mistakes – like all reporters, I certainly have – but, unfortunately, the Royal Household seems institutionally incapable of admitting it has ever got anything wrong. Mistakes and misinformation diminish the standing and authority of the Queen but a failure to admit to them does even more damage.
Basically, the guy is calling out Buckingham Palace’s lackeys (or as Diana called them, “The Men in Grey”) for lying about Kate’s title this whole time. But here’s the thing: I don’t think Buckingham Palace was lying. I think the Queen very purposefully did not give Kate a “princess” title and the Queen made sure her people told the press that Kate was only supposed to be referred to as “the Duchess of Cambridge” and never “Princess Catherine” or “Princess William”. And I think William was pissed off about that. I think William wanted Kate to be considered a princess, and he had been fighting for Kate to get a princess title for years. So William gave her a “princess” title on Prince George’s birth certificate and rather than have some royal family kerfuffle, Buckingham Palace merely submitted to William’s princess scheme. Doesn’t that make more sense?
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Isn’t she technically a princess but styled a duchess?
I think this is all just a tempest in a teapot. That reporter has too much time on his hands.
Agree. He just feels foolish and wants everyone to know he was given the wrong information.
He is pissed because he is the most obsequious royal reporter who is generally trusted by the palace to put out whatever the palace wants him to put out.
He does josh the palace from time to time eg Kate’s constant shopping habits and lack of a work ethic, but I think William’s desire to have his own way, has left everyone with red faces and since William can’t be reprimanded or corrected, the reporters are left looking foolish and their information mistrusted.
As he says, the palace and therefore HM was very clear about what Kate is/was and have held firm for 2yrs.
William surprised everyone, got all the experts scrambling, and since HM isn’t going to publicly contradict her own grandson, it stays.
We all know she rarely, if at all, does confrontation, and simply gives in to whoever shouts loudest (metaphorically speaking).
So like Anne and the order of status, William gets to call his wife princess Kate just as he always wanted to. And everyone can blame the Queen for not making it clear from day one. And if that fails, blame the royal reporters for putting out misinformation that they were given in the first place.
Ps:- the BRF website hasn’t been changed. So the Palace is talking, but not doing….
LAK, what would have been the correct answer for William to have given, in your opinion? Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, or Prince and Duchess? I’m not being sarcastic, I just don’t know and you seem very knowledgable about the RF.
@ goodnames – they are duke and duchess
@Sisi
Right, I know that, I just mean what would have been the right answer for him to put on the birth certificate. I mean, he IS a prince, and was so before he was a Duke….so…
GoodNamesAllTaken – if you look at the form, under ‘title’ slot, he has put the correct titles for everyone. So, by his own hand, she’s a duchess. It’s where he puts ‘princess)’ under the ‘occupation’ slot that the misunderstandings begin.
honestly, I have never seen a title used as an occupation except in ye old times when being a ‘prince’ meant something ie they ruled properly. Or in countries where absolute monarchies are still the norm. The only person in the BRF whose title = job and therefore occupation is the monarch so she can legitimately say her occupation is Queen.
William’s current occupation is RAF pilot which is what I’d have expected to see, but perhaps we’ve been wrong about that too.
@ goodnames I meant that was what he should have put in the occupation box. Honestly I find it odd enough that someone who chose not to have fulltime active royal duties can write it down as his occupation, lol.
Frankly, I think from all this William comes out looking like a little boy trying to have his little revenge and getting his way at the expense of what his superiors decided a long time ago.
Honestly, it seems to me that the Queen is right in trying to humble Kate a little: after all, she is essentially a girl who had big ambitions (fostered by her mother) and who schemed to get ahead socially.
I’m not judging her (the royal history is filled with these kind of situations, and God bless), it just seems like William is very much played by Kate and by what she wants: she wants to be known as Princess, she wants to vacation a lot, she wants to go shopping and have “the good life”… he wants to give it to her. Not a very strong character, is he?
I’m team Liz on all this.
LAK, Sisi, RocketMerry
I’ve really enjoyed reading this. Your input has made this easier to understand.
Side item… I heard William has already left to go away to Devon(?) with his guy friends for the weekend when he should be back at his RAF job. Any truth to this?
@LAK and Sisi
Ok, I see what you mean now. Thanks for taking the time to explain.
On William’s certificate, Charles listed himself as “Prince of the United Kingdom”, there was no spot for the occupation of the mother. So this isn’t something that came out of nowhere.
People are reading way too much into nothing.
Florc- yep. Apparently was recognised on a London-> Exeter train (notice London NOT Bucklebury) by fellow passengers.
Ps:- as always, it’s ok for them to be living and doing what they want, I just wish they’d stop trying to convince us of the opposite.
I agree. The tabloids are just fishing for something to squawk about.
She’s technically a duchess, and is styled as a princess now apparently “princess william of wales”. Although as LAK said, the official royal website still has her style and title as “Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn and Lady Carrickfergus” and zilch about being princess william of wales, so I don’t think much has really changed. From what I can tell, still not a princess in her own right.
http://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/TheDuchessofCambridge/Stylesandtitles.aspx
No wife of a prince is a princess in her own right, she’s a princess by courtesy of her husband’s title (just like a non-royal duchess is a duchess because she married a duke, etc). Even Diana was a princess only because she married a prince. That’s the reasoning used to put royal-born princesses “over” married princesses in the order of precedence, even if the married princess has a “higher” title, like the case of Princess Anne and Camilla, or the York girls out-ranking Kate. (And that whole mess started because Anne didn’t want to curtsey to Camilla so QE2 made up the whole “born princesses are more princessy than married princesses” thing.)
I think this is all just a symptom of Windsor family in-fighting. If you look back even just 100 years, the precedent was that wives assumed their husband’s position in the order of precedence. Therefore, a married princess *would* outrank a born princess if her husband’s title was higher. So Camilla would have outranked Princess Anne because Charles is the Prince of Wales, but again, Anne didn’t want to curtsey to Camilla. So QE2 rewrote the rule and now the order of precedence is all bumbley-whoopsed.
I remember reading before their wedding that William wanted QE2 to make Kate a princess in her own right so that she would be Princess Catherine, and not what her title would be by marriage, Princess William of Wales. QE2’s counter offer was to create for them a royal dukedom, so at least then she could be called by her own name, ie, Duchess Kate.
Basically the palace’s line from the beginning should have been “Yes she’s a princess because she married a prince, but she didn’t want to be called ‘Princess William’ for the next 30-40 years, so they took a title and she is officially now Duchess Kate. Good day, sir. …I said good day!”
Well he does work for the Daily Express which is probably the most racist, homophobic, and anti-immigration rag in the UK. Keep whining, that’s what you get paid for.
I agree with your theory. That was exactly what I was thinking.
The fact that reporters are so up in arms over this is kind of hilarious.
My thoughts exactly. I mean, they’re really getting their panties in a wad over whether she’s a Duchess or a Princess? Must be a really slooooow news day, lol.
I could care less if she is a duchess or princess– but obviously, many in the palace do.
William and Kate remind me of children. See? They’re getting their way now, which means that they are just going to push more and more until they could have EVERYTHING they ever wanted (which, really? What is left?). You give them an inch, they take the whole country.
If the reporter has a long history of accurate reporting and has built a very solid reputation based on this, I could see where he would be bothered. It takes away from his credibility to put forth accurate, trustworthy information.
EXACTLY, that’s his entire point. Pr.William’s little antic made everyone including the Queen have to change what they were initially told. William needs to realise he will need the press one day, if this marriage goes belly up or there is another scandal involving Kate.
Yes ut make sense.
The Queen is like her mom, not sweet old lady more old witch. Do You remember how was she behaving when Diana was divorced by Charles( no Royal Highness anymore) or Fergie( no Christmas time with the Girls). No even speaking about which princess is better the born one (Eugenie)or the married in one(Kate). she is hard working , yes but no empathy ouside her blood.Like QEII, who kept her title after the King died + castle + apanage as a Queen.
When the queen mum was married to Albert- when he still was prince and second in line to the throne (like William), they were also Duke and Duchess. I don’t think she ever was a princess when Edward was on the throne. She may have gone from duchess immediately to queen. And the title Queen Dowager existed long before Elizabeth became one. It was not a title that was made especially for her.
The closer Elizabeth got to the throne, the higher her title became. And Kate is still very far from the throne. They are third generation.
I always expected that Kate’s title would change the moment William became the active Prince of Wales or maybe even later. Guess William wasn’t having it and change the tradidion to get his way. Not that I care about them. The period of the cousins: Kaiser Wilhelm, King George (father in law of Queen Mum) and Tsar Nicholas is far more fascinating to me.
Technically though the Queen mum being married to a prince meant she was a princess. What fascinates me that Charles and Anne being born of a princess weren’t entitled to a title and Elizabeth’s parents knowing she would soon be queen allowed them to become prince and princess before she inherited the title of Queen. Liz shouldn’t be such a stick in the mud over titles.
SISI, For the first: we are not speaking about Queen Dowager here, she was using Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother!!!
For the second: According to the history she was the brain behind the idea withelding the HRH title frm Duches of Windsor while Edward was a Royal Highness.
The Wizz – as a female, the queen couldn’t pass on titles to her children even though she was destined to be Queen herself.
Therefore her father had to make a special ruling that her kids could have titles rather than be commoners. Just as the queen has had to do for William’s kids (or to be specific, the eldest child of the POW).
Her father also made a special ruling to create Philip a royal duke because otherwise the Queen would be marrying a commoner.
You are right that she is a stick in the mud about these things because she seems to have stuck to whatever traditions/rules her father and grandfather made or adhered to.
You can count on one hand the changes she’s made, and usually only because her hand has been forced.
@ Martha, yeah but didn’t Mary hold the same title hrh Queen Mary while her husband was dead and her sons had the throne because in that timeframe she was the Mother of the monarch?
@LAK
I thought Prince Phillip had been born Prince Phillip of Greece. So he was a royal person, not a commoner. Yes, his family lost it all and he was in the British Royal Navy as a commoner, but he was actually a prince. King George gave him the title of Duke of Edinburgh when he married Elizabeth and later on the queen made him Prince Phillip again. If I’m wrong please explain, I love to learn this stuff and you’re good. 🙂
Philip “gave up” his Greek/Danish title when he was naturalized (as part of the process of becoming a British subject). The legality/validity of this is somewhat dubious to some people though – some people say you can’t stop being a prince like this, and some people say that Philip couldn’t be naturalized since he was already a British citizen by the Sophia Naturalization Act… But the royal family was pretty consistent about Philip not being a Prince for a while – he was just HRH Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.
But Philip was “only” the son of a son of a king, so his sons wouldn’t be princes in their own right. Usually only the children of a son of a king are automatically princes… though in some times (Victoria) it was different in practice.
What A said.
In giving up his Greek titles and becoming a British citizen, he became a commoner. There seems to have been a kerfuffle (too long winded to explain here) over our princess marrying a ‘foreigner’ and one with sisters married to Nazis, so he was made a British citizen as quickly As possible. It wasn’t enough that he’d lived in Britain most of his life and was naturalised as @A has explained.
The ducal title was granted to re-elevate him so she wasn’t marrying a commoner.
@LAK: If Camilla outlives Charles while he is ruling, does she get the title of Queen Dowager? What is her future royal-wise, post Charles?
Lady D – if Camilla outlive Charles, she’ll be Dowager of whatever titles he holds at time of his death.
Ps:- it’ll make it interesting if she becomes a dowager whilst Princess Consort since that is an unprecedented title to begin with.
Kate is not hardworking, in fact she hardly works, she ran out on the Olympic duties to go to France and sunbathe Nude with William and created a whole Fergie type scandal for the Palace.
If Kate’s a Princess then so is Prince Edward’s wife Sophie she would be Princess Edward and she is a lot more hardworking than Kate ever was and Sophie is the Queen’s favorite of the married-ins.
Kate doesn’t work on much except her hair.
It’s obvious that they are trying to learn from past mistakes and ensure the wife doesn’t become more popular than the heir e.g. Diana and Fergie.
If Kate were going to be taken to th heart by th public like Diana was, it would have already happened. Most of Kate’s press is to hype her, Diana didn’t need that, people truly loved Diana. Kate and William are both not very charismatic, Harry is the one who has charisma out of the three and probably Baby George. Ha!
I think your theory is right, but I also think it’s silly that there’s even a fight over it.
Blue Marie
It is silly at face value. It’s more intriguing to wonder if this was more of a power play. William has a long history of temper tantrums and doing things without the Queens approval. It’s interesting to see how all of these bits unfold over time.
And it’s interesting to see people interpret this as “William loves Kate enough to tell off the Queen!” When in reality this is just a power play. He ought to be careful poking the lion like that. QE2 always struck me as a passive woman that will let a lot go without directly confronting it, but when you keep persisting she’ll knock you out cold.
well, when you put it like that, I’m curious to see how this all plays out.
How is this a temper tantrum though? It is just people reading way too much into nothing.
He didn’t list her title as Princess, simply the occupation. There wasn’t even a spot for the occupation of the mother on the certificate when William was born.
Merritt
But he put Princess in front of her name. The association of the 2 words of course makes this a thing. It would have been cute if William listed his occupation as RAF pilot and Kate as… Military wife? I honestly am not sure what else he’d put. Instead he put this and BP blew up from endless questions from reporters.
I guess ultimately this is answered perfectly below… Being a princess is not an occupation. It’s a title. And Kate only has this through her husband, but not on her own.
Until then she’s no princess of the UK. She’s a Duchess and her occupation is being a patron to charities and being mother to the future King.As far as William and his temper this is for association. Maybe, and i’m just messing around here, The Queen refused to give Kate her own title as princess so William took it upon himself with this little bit because he was told he couldn’t have what he wanted.
@ FLORC
Unless we are looking at different documents, then Princess is not listed in from of her name.
I feel like whatever was written under “occupation” would be picked apart. If he had listed her as a homemaker, people would have freaked out. If she had been listed as a charity patron, people would have taken issue with that.
I really still think this is a case of people reading way too much in to this.
I think William knows exactly what he’s about and my hat’s off to him. This comes down to blood and he is calling the Queen out and saying Kate is equal to royal blood by marriage and is a princess. William has the tiger by the tail and he knows it. IMO
I do like how William steps up for Kate, makes me like him more.
And folks always try and insist Wills doesn’t really love Kate. But time & again, he rebels against his family in favor of her & the Middletons. He loves her alright.
I think it shows he’s his mother’s son, and I love it.
When he was still little, William famously told his mother, when she was divorced & stripped of her ‘HRH’, “When I’m King, I’ll give it back to you!” He’s been bitter about this title/royal vs. common thing for a LONG time.
Well I think he picks Middletons and Kate because they kiss him at all the right places, worship the ground he walks on, do whatever the hell he wants them to do, please him at any cost and basically boosts his ego. That’s why he choose her and them, not because he is so in love with her IMO. He already left her at her parents house and instead of spending every free weekend with her and George he is out partying with friend (and still he is the serious prince) but she and her family will never complain and do whatever he wants to them to do.
Also she is princess William and it was always known, so I don’t get it how he is standing up for her.
Sounds so romantic, that William loves Waity so much. Not IMO. He is ‘elevating’ her because it reflects on him and his position. It’s all about him.
Ahoyhoy
You read this as a gesture from a husband to his wife demanding his love be respected and a statement of love, but you ignore all the evidence of how William is rarely ever with his wife and even now has abandon her at her parent’s home so he can party with his friends. Or how Kate is rarely under the same roof as her husband and quite often exists at her parent’s home.
Everyone else reads this as the boy princes wanting his way and more an act of selfishness than a gesture of love.
You cant pick and choose what William does that you’ll believe by how easily it can be interpreted as love.
The biggest hole in this argument for me is how he treated her horribly for years while dating. No man can understand this is bad behavior when his gf waits for him to return to her and will not confront him on how his behavior hurts her. This is their documented dating history. I doubt anything has changed with being married.
Is this what’s considered journalism nowadays? Guy sounds bitter and pathetic.
Her occupation is a princess, that just cracks me up!
Funny, I was thinking the same thing. *I* want to be able to write that as my occupation. Sounds way better than “administrative assistant”.
Heheh.
I’m confused, does William and Kate have a last name? I so don’t understand this monarchy stuff. Seems so outdated to me.
Technically they don’t. I think. I looked this up once, and the royal family doesn’t have a “last name” the way we think of it. All very medieval. But they are entitled to use various estate names and titles for last name, ie. “Windsor”.
They don’t have a surname,but for the purposes of legal documents, they can use ‘Windsor’ and for The Queen’s direct descendants ‘Mountbatten-Windsor’.
For the french court case, William’s surname is listed as ‘Mountbatten-Windsor’ as are everyone’s wedding certificates from Anne etc.
He simply left it off the form.
LAK,
I’m wondering if you can tell me why Edward was made an earl instead of a duke. I imagine its because there’s no way in hell he’d ever become king, but I’m wondering if this is a tradition with third sons. I also wonder if its because Andrew is the favorite child and she wants him to be above Edward.
LAK will tell me if I’m wrong, but my understanding is he is an Earl because he will be Duke of Edinburgh when the current one dies.
@LAK
I thought Edward only got to be an Earl because he did not serve in the armed forces. He signed up and then dropped out. Both Charles and Andrew served in the navy and Andrew was in combat in the Falklands.
@ Maya
Like bluhare said Edward is in line to inherit his father’s dukedom, so that’s why he currently has a title considered lower and Duke.
I read somewhere that he himself requested the title Earl of Wessex, though I don’t remember where.
@ Mayamae – I read that Edward will become Duke of Edinburgh when Prince Philip dies. Because he will inherit the title Duke of Edinburgh from his father, that is why he became an Earl when he married Sophie.
What Bluhare said.
Also, there is a really stupid but true reason why he is an Earl not a duke.
He was offered a dukedom. However, he wanted to be the *Earl of Wessex because he saw it in SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE and asked about it, the Queen accepted provided he becomes DoE when the current one dies.
As the other 2 sons have dukedom that are in line with their succession positions ie the heir/spare are always POW/DOY, he is left to inherit their father’s ducal title.
However, since it’s a royal dukedom,it will first revert back to the crown before being conferred on him. However, the title is thought to be a done deal.
*Earl of Wessex is a real title that had reverted back to the crown due to lack of heirs to inherit. I think it hadn’t been used since 1071, but it’s still funny that he took his title off a Hollywood film.
Miss Bennett – (I feel I ought to write this in proper English! 🙂 ) their occupation doesn’t determine their titles. There are certain titles, usually dukedom, reserved for the royals. They all have order of precedence depending on order of birth within the line of succession. However, as Edward demonstrated, one can request a title outside the usual rules.
Thanks everybody.
I’m also very curious about a question that came up awhile back. Traditionally, only the children of the male line get certain titles. Now that the first born child, regardless of gender, becomes king/queen, people are wondering if the females in the family will become more titled. For instance, a daughter of the ruler, becoming a duchess in her own right.
Mayamae – That is an assumption, but it doesn’t appear to have been addressed. They only talked about the succession.
It certainly hasn’t been addressed as far as the peerage is concerned.
@ Mayamae
on one hand the rules still say that mostly the sons of the monarch (at the grace of the monarch) get the dukedoms. On the other the Duchy of Cornwall always provided for the heir apparent upon becoming first in line to the throne and girls now can become heir apparent, which means they can become prince of wales I think. This would mean that they’d also get that duchy and thus can become Duke of Cornwall in theory.
Elizabeth officially has male titles including two duke-titles because she is King AND Queen and because she cannot be outranked by her husband when it comes to titles, so a woman can get the male terms.
However if you really look into the rules, they haven’t thought this far ahead and it isn’t worked out yet. This counts for the title Prince of wales and the other titles. All they looked at was the ‘birth’ part, not the rest of the kids life. It would certainly become tricky if husbands become involved. Dukedoms are usually given out at marriage (except in the case of the Prince of Wales who gets it upon accession of the parent as monarch), so they’d probably start to have this discussion when it happens to be an issue. Princess Anne’s husband was made an Earl while she remained the Princess Royal.
Dukedoms are given out by the Monarch, so if the monarch chooses to give it to a woman (which has happened once or twice) she does become Duchess Suo Jure and no one is stopping the Monarch. If William had a girl first and then would become king, he would have done whatever he wanted, just like in this situation with Kate’s title. Hypothetically speaking: there’s no way that child would not have become princess of wales in combination with the Duchy.
One study of the family genealogy said that their last name was actually Guelph. So since Queen Elizabeth is married to a Battenburg prince, their name is now Battenburg-Guelph.
It is a silly thing to get upset about BUT the reporter is upset about being LIED to by the Palace. Plain and simple.And he just realized that if they lie about something so trivial as this, God knows what else they have lied about. And he also came to the realization the Palace uses the media to get their agenda out regardless if it’s true or not. Doesn’t feel good being used.
Good observation.
an occupation is no title.
Why should the Queen´s spokesmen and the other Buckhouse people lie? They know the protocol and the rules.
Now it seems that they make damage control because William gave Kate a new “occupation”. They won´t change things or her titles officially, i bet they hope people will now shut up about this.
I don´t get why some people are desperate to make Kate a Princess. When the Queen dies and Kate is still married to William she will become the Princess of Wales and people/ press will call her Princess Kate like they still say Princess Diana.
And this reporter sounds a little bit insane… creepy.
Exactly. Her “occupation” is that she is married to a prince, and is a princess of the realm – which in of itself is silly and archaic, but whatever.
Her title is duchess.
I mean – my occupation is a writer. But my title at work is information developer.
FWIW, I doubt there is any feud between gran and grandson or really anything going on here at all other than the reporter’s hissy fit. Maybe they should change his beat to something that matters – send him off to Afghanistan.
(And if William were really being savvy and PR-friendly, he should have entered his occupation as “RAF Pilot” and Kate’s as “housewife”, because as we are constantly reminded, these two are just normal everyday folks – they aren’t on the civil list and haven’t taken up full time royal duties).
I think the old argument that since they’re not on the civil list they’re not living on tax payer funds has been disproven and beaten here. Much like their servants, are paid for by others and some of that money does come from those funds. How their homes are always under renovations and both structural and cosmetic renovations are paid for by tax payers. These 2 do not have to be on the list to receive the benefits.
You’re absolutely right. He’s a RAF pilot and she’s a homemaker or housewife. Princess is not an occupation.
Suse
Unless i’m confusing Palmer with another this man gets all the exclusives straight from the Middletons. I think it’s him. He can’t be all that creepy or insane if the Middletons have him on speed dial.
Palmer gets his information directly from the palace. It’s Tanna who gets his information from the Middletons.
I think there are several issues going on. Items the royal reporter can’t come out and say, or he would lose access.
When Charles married that woman, the palace had to contort itself to explain why she wasn’t Princess of Wales. It used that precedent with Kate because after all she is a commoner, a fish out of water. They didn’t know how she would behave. They also didn’t know if she was going to bolt. Either marital problems or press phobia could have driven her away. Not being an official Princess distanced her from the firm and any damage she could do. The public could have hated her and she could have bombed.
There was also an article that came out after they were married, probably planted, about who Kate had to curtsey to (when William wasn’t with her). Basically all the hangers on because they were born Royal. This is William’s declaration that not only is she a Princess, but she is only going to curtsey to 3 people (Liz, Phil, and Charlie) regardless of whether William is with her or not.
I think your take is spot-on.
But also, the other side of it is that perhaps IF the Queen had her lackeys call Kate a princess from the beginning, that there would have been fewer problems integrating her into the family, helping her gain support from the public, etc. It probably would have helped Kate a LOT if in the first couple years of her marriage, she could have gotten that public recognition that, duh, she is a princess.
So why didn’t the Queen recognize her as princess from the get-go? I dunno. This whole thing smacks of: older woman punishing a younger woman for “having it too easy,” which I see a lot of right now — speaking as a younger woman.
And what’s sad about that is that as a result, Kate has had to rely on her husband, a man, to help her get the recognition she rightfully deserves. When she could’ve gotten that support from another woman from the get-go.
You are all reading too far into this. The DoC title is higher than Princess William so Kate goes by that. Its the same reason William is called Duke on official stuff, its a higher title. Thats all there is to all of this.
What m said.
A ducal title is higher status than a prince title, so really, the Queen has honoured Kate if we are to use your own argument.
M
Speaking to your older women make it tough for younger women that they assume have had it too easy statement. I’m young and I see nothing wrong with this. Having attended a very nice university with many people that have had life very easy it refreshing when someone older and harder comes along and presents you with challenges. The people that have had it easy crack or thrive. I see nothing wrong with this. If you mean that the older generation are relentless in throwing obstacles at you and it’s just reached a level of hate then that’s bad.
What recognition does Kate rightfully deserve? Because it seems she could have it if she didn’t ignore her charities so often. Yes, she should not have to rely on a man for anything, but she’s built herself a world where that’s her only choice. I’m no Diana fan, but she went out there and earned her place in history by not relying on a man.
Maybe i’d be more forgiving if Kate didn’t just marry into a position because she hung around the longest or earned a living or used her degree. No respect should be given to a woman who lives for a man that doesn’t respect her enough to not cheat.
Any other form of respect seems archaic.
I’m not a connoisseur of royal protocol, but to most people the princess title would of course sound higher than duchess. Take a look around some internet forums — Kate has been deliberately referred to as just “duchess.” People don’t even use her name and it’s just been out of sheer spite. The hate for her has just been insane and weird, including on this board.
As to Kitten (kitten?), I’m not sure if you’re actually young — or so young that you don’t know how difficult it is for people in their 20s right now. You just sound seriously deluded and not cognizant of what constitutes bullying, essentially, and what’s actually helpful guidance from older people.
And how does keeping the princess title from Kate present her with a useful obstacle, exactly? Right.
Eh. Whatever. I actually believe the reporter’s basic point — back in 2011, he asked about about long-standing protocol (Princess William, Princess Edward, etc) but this guy from the press office kept insisting that it WASN’T long-standing protocol, so the press thought, “uh, OK then” and believed the press office guy.
Now William did an end-run around that. Maybe he wasn’t paying attention — the palace is still quoting the old standard on the webpage about Princess Michael — or maybe he did it deliberately because he thought the downgrade/change in protocol wasn’t good for him/his wife.
If I had to guess, I’d guess the whole kerfuffle had some of its origins (not all, but some) in the post-1997 campaign to downgrade the profile of the Family by reducing/limiting titles and civil list awards, combined with Charles’s ongoing attempts to streamline his siblings right out of the Firm.
I also think we’re too quick to forget that Charles and Camilla have their own bloody agenda and it doesn’t necessarily align with William’s own ideas. Charles wants Camilla to be styled a Queen. He wants people never, ever, ever to bring up giving the crown to William after Elizabeth’s death, ever again. Letting William and Kate step up to a more public profile? Not in his interests, either. (William looks indifferent but Charles pushes that along.)
I don’t feel particularly strongly about the royal family one way or the other, but I did watch the royal wedding, and I remember this from the discussion that the commentators were having. I truly don’t think buckingham palace lied about it, because the Princess William of Wales title is far too oddly specific for me to have made up on my own, with so little knowledge of Royal customs
It sounds hilarious to us Americans but I can imagine it’s a HUGE deal across the pond. He is making Kate his equal, which I think is rather sweet.
Actually it’s only a huge deal to a handful of people, and to the rest it’s just another gossip story (on for instance CeleBitchy) or a ‘lolwut’ thing.
So we all should start to call her Princess Crumpets, let’s move on.
Glad to live dans la République where people cut off royal heads centuries ago.
This has been known/reported about for ages! It’s simply that it’s more “user friendly” to call her Duchess Kate than Princess William. Also to avoid her being called Princess Kate, which is not her title. Who cares? The Americans call the queen “the Queen of England” so really anything goes! Also in the same way, Camilla will be queen, even if she gets referred to as “Princes Consort” and actually she currently holds the title of Princess of Wales, which is not used out of respect (better late than never, right?) to the late Diana.
If you marry a prince or are the daughter of a prince you are in fact a princess. Prince Edward’s daughter is in fact a princess despite the fact at the moment she is called a Lady. By convention she can claim the princess title too.
All of this debate over her title is ridiculous. People need to remember that even the Elizabeth II’s beloved mother was titled a Duchess until George VI became king. So there was never an intended slight by the Queen in giving the Duchess title. It was following tradition.
I’m laughing so hard at that form. It was like it was written by a 5-year-old. Princess of… Prince of…
For real. His Royal Highness….lol
Wow. Talk about first world problems…..
Hahaha that’s so true!
Eh, not really. Same fuss in kingdoms/ royals in developing countries 😀
Good point. “Upper crust” problems then?
There is a kingdom in Africa (Toro) where there was an almighty fuss over their princess marrying a commoner who compounded this by being a foreigner….
Kept the national news of the country in print from all the outraged articles and talking heads.
LOL@all of this. I get some of you are into the title game, but this dude is just ticked off because he went with the Queen’s story and, apparently, he chose poorly. The only thing I find interesting about this story is that William had to fill out the birth certificate himself and I’m imagining him trying to find space to cram in his big, ol’, official title in the tiny space provided. And hey, if that’s the reason William did it then, eh, so what. Good for him. He picked “George” to appease the Queen so she can appease him and call his wife “Princess.”
Lol I can just magine Wills saying ” I wanted to call him Max”….
I can see him scratching his head and thinking: “How do I fit all my importance into this tiny little box???”
William did not fill this out himself. He went to or was already at KP where Alison Cathcart who is a deputy registrar at Westminster traveled to visit him for this filing. She filled it out with him there.
I think the bigger story here is why couldn’t she have traveled to the Middleton’s home so William would not have been away from his newborn and the wife he adores.
Also, William did not travel to KP that day. He had been there and that’s why Cathcart met him there.
Push Present Princess. 😀
part-time push present princess 🙂
Does it matter, in the long run, to anybody? Not really. I think it’s just another example of how sketchy these two can be. And ticking off a royal reporter who was previously one of your most obsequious sycophants probably isn’t the best PR move.
I agree, RAF pilot and housewife would’ve been PR gold but William is really thick and not at all PR savvy like his mother. He just pissed off his biggest supporter and he will learn the hard way how much he needs media. Look at his father, once media gives up on him he will be ruined and behaviour like this will be his downfall IMO.
That’s true. If he really wanted the public to believe they are just like us, then list their occupations as RAF pilot & housewife. But that’s a little too common for him.
I agree, RAF pilot and housewife would’ve been PR gold but it’s too common for the great, the amazing, the most self important person in the UK prince William and his doormat, sorry I mean precious wife Kate oh sorry they want you to call her Catherin. The great William also pissed off his biggest supporter, he is not at all media savvy and really thick.
not only isn’t he very media savvy, he’s also not very family-savvy. Because now it looks like the queen either made a mistake or was powerless to a lesser ranked royal. Seems like a lose-lose situation for her, I can already envisage Liz’s epic ‘not amused’ face
Whenever I read about the current royals and their current antics, I always like to think about the royals in days of yore and the terrible terrible terrible things they often did.
And it’s like, yeah, this is nothing.
How in the world can anyone care about this?? I don’t get it, I really don’t.
I don’t get it either, but it is entertaining to watch the machinations over an archaic title. Snobbery at its best. So much for wanting to be normal, when it’s a big deal to you what word is in front of your wife’s name.
What’s hilarious to me is how people know all the little details and rules about how these stupid titles are given out I just call all those people the Famous Inbred Welfare Family of England. Except for Harry, he’s been a soldier and has actually done useful things.
Notice -when the reporter was asking for clarification, he specifically did not ask for Camilla’s title to be clarified. Why would we compare Kate’s title to that of William’s uncles, and not his step-mother? Because therein lies the “scandal” — the Queen does not want any of them to be Princesses. She’s done with non-blood Princess titles. Done.
Not gonna stop Chuck or Wills.
I have only scanned the article– but I will say this about Palmer. During BabyGate 2013– when Twitter was abuzz– the man was always 3 steps ahead of everyone else. I kept his Twitter account open and ignored all others.
1% problem.
Who cares whether she’s a princess or not? I mean to the rest of the world (outside of royal circles) she is already a princess in their heads. No need to get caught up in the technicalities of it. It’s not like the royals have any real power anymore, they are more tourist/press attractions.
But they do still have real authority! It’s rarely used, but they have it and would like you to not know about it. Just look at the pretty dresses they wear when doing charity work and stop being so nosey!
I love the idea that Wills always wanted Kate to be a princess, and this was his way of making it so. It reminds me of a little girl who insists her dolly is really a princess, and creates a “birth certificate” to prove it. The creativity of children can truly be magical.
Lol
I see it as a slight to have an occupation of ‘Princess’ because life isn’t a fairy tale. It’s fine to have the title of ‘Princess’ but for occupation I’d want a real job.
And I’m more excited to see how Will filled out the birth certificate than I’ve been about the actual baby.
Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.
As an American, I can’t get my panties in a bunch over all this. So silly!
Sincerely,
Dottie, Princess of St. Louis
I’m Sisi, Princess of The Kitchen
I’m Wendy, Princess of Nerd.
I am Her Royal Highness Princess Buttercup.
aw shoot, I forgot the HRH. Are you now higher in rank than me?
HRH Tara, Princess Could Care Less, curtseys only to HRM, Don’t Give A Damn. Now if we’re talking about Edward II or Eddie III then i am interested.
You do realise that Edward II was gay and obsessed with his lover Piers Gaveston to cost of his own reign and Kingdom???
Mind you, if you are male and gay yourself, that’s OK, except for the obsessed part. Who wants a person super obsessed with someone else no matter their orientation?
“…St. James Palace actively lied about Kate’s royal titles…”
I read that as “royal titties” at first. I either need more coffee or new contact lenses. And why does any of this matter so much? It’s 2013! Why is her being a princess or not being one such a big deal in Britain?
Would bring an interesting angle to the boobgate scandal.
if princess of michael of kent can be called princess without people having conniptions, then i dont see how technically kate cant be a princess, even though we are calling her duchess?
Because Prince Michael was not given a Dukedom by the Queen, so his wife automatically became Princess Michael she is not a Duchess like Kate. It is different for Kate, she married a Prince who became HRH TheDuke of Cambridge on his wedding day, so thus she was titled Duchess of Cambridge. There is a big difference.
Kate’s title is no different than Fergie’s really who was HRH Duchess of York on her wedding day, even though she married Prince Andrew, she was titled under his Duke of York title, because that is the title the Queen bestowed upon him on his wedding day. Why can’t people see Kate married the second in line who was given a Dukedom on his wedding day thus she became a Duchess,as Sarah did who married Prince Andrew.
I guess there are two types of “Princess of the United Kingdom,” those that are born of or married to a prince. So Kate is a Princess of the United Kingdom by marriage, but she uses the feminine title of her husband’s dukedom. I can’t believe they are trying to call her Princess Kate when they know that it is inappropriate, even Duchess Kate, as the American press calls her. Maybe it is easier for the press to use/say Princess/Duchess Kate instead of Duchess of Cambridge because it is a long title to use/say, but I think they are trying to cause conflict within the family.
I think the Queen gives William too much freedom and she needs to reign him in and explain to him his own family’s history, he seems oblivious to it or wants to change the rules. Just because Kate had an heir doesn’t mean he should tell the Queen that she should be called a Princess now, that is if he is trying to. Diana had him and she was still called Princess of Wales, not Princess Diana (a media given title).
Even if William wasn’t given a dukedom when married, she still couldn’t use Princess Kate, only Princess William of Wales. We might see Princess Henry of Wales in the future that is if Prince Harry doesn’t want a dukedom or earldom on his wedding day. I read on Wikipedia that he might be styled Duke of Sussex when married so his wife will be, Name, Duchess of Sussex. What’s the fuss? If I can understand all of this title nonsense then I’m sure the press can.
But is William trying to make Kate “Princess Catherine”? All I have seen is William trying to make her *a* princess, which… I don’t see how she can possibly NOT be a princess.
No one knows what dukedom will be given to Harry. There are about 5 vacant royal dukedoms meaning 5 possibilities.
Many fans seems to want him to be Sussex. Can you imagine the fun people would have with a ‘party prince’ whose title is sussex?!
Personally I want either Suffolk or Clarence.
Maybe he just gave away the Queen’s push present a bit early.
I think everybody is overlooking the fact that the whole thing is filled out by the registrar, it’s in the exact same handwriting…that person likely got it wrong or William just signed it without reading it. Or maybe it looks better from a historical perspective to have the heir to the throne have a mother titled princess…talk about tempest in a teacup!!!
BBC confirmed that the form was filled out by William himself, NOT the registrar.
LAK
Interesting. I’d expect William to have much better penmanship! I mean he must had had a class on that. I did not attend and private boarding schools and I did. Especially if he is to be King one day. His penmanship is 1 step up from chicken scratch!
And then who filled out “Middleton” on the form. The writing style is by someone else completely different.
It’s been stated William was absolutely there and with her filling it out. She spoke highly of having met him and how nice he was. It’s her handwriting, but he was the one telling her what to put.
I know I am going to get so much $hit for this. But really: I can’t believe we’re having this conversation in 2013.
But that’s the whole fun of it: like Game of Thrones, the reality show.
Like Game of Thrones? That would be awesome, if it includes the events of last season’s finale.
Game of Thrones is principally based on the reality that was the War of the Roses in the 15th century. who says history can’t inspire pop culture?
I simply don’t understand the confusion. She is a princess but is not Princess Katherine.
I am not a journalist or anyone who needs to know this but I have been clear on the point since the wedding.
This guy has just made a complete idiot of himself.
i think people who dont like them are making a lot of it, but nothing has changed and i dont see where technically it is incorrect
And why do they still have the monarchy? So dumb but I can understand the reporter’s frustration.
Occupation: shopper, hair stylee
Ok aside from all these royal titles technicalities, I am just chuckling over Princess or Prince as an occupation. It’s like a 6 year old wrote it down while playing Barbie and Ken. The best description for occupation for both of them would be homemaker/charity worker and pilot.
The Queen probably didn’t want waity to be a princess from the get go because she couldn’t see manchild willie and waity even together when she died and Charles became king.
She is still NOT Princess Kate or Catherine, she would be Princess WILLIAM had William not been given a dukedom. A royal dukedom outweighs a Prince title-it’s higher up in the peerage food chain. Because Kate is NOT a royal by blood she could NEVER be styled Princess Kate. She only received her husband’s rank when she married as a curtesy, she did not receive it in her own right.
Well there was a whole kerfuffle back in the day about stripping Diana of her titles post-divorce, so maybe the Queen is not holding her breath on this marriage lasting forever and hedging the Palace’s bets with the title.
He styled her occupation as a Princess of the United kingdom. but look closely at her name he did not call her HRH princess Catherine or HRH Princess William he called her HRH Catherine Duchess of Cambridge .. That is her title yes technically she is a princess… however her official title is Duchess.
This writer is making a fuss because he has nothing to do but Whinge
I think some people really do care because there are implications to her being styled Princess of the UK.
Then I think others are “upset” because of the “principal of the thing.” You know.
Could this have been “a hey I’m a prince, my son’s a prince, and well heck I guess that makes my wife a princess” kind of thing? Or was it passive-aggressive slight of hand? Or it could have been I treat Kate like excrement, but this will make her and her happy?
Frankly, it was just stupid (and stupid sounding) to write “Princess of the UK” as an occupation. For what it’s worth, they would have been better off writing in something like “Royal Herder of Unicorns” given how antiquated and fairy tale like “Princess of the UK” sounds.
For what it’s worth, I’m on the side that says William should have written in RAF Pilot/Duke of Cambridge and Homemaker/Wife/Duchess of Cambridge as their occupations.
Back to the “principal of the thing,” Will and Kate have really gotten off to a shaky start IMO. I can imagine people thinking and saying that William/BP are really trying too hard to “make a place for Kate” by either shoe-horning her in, forcing her into the hierarchy by ramming stuff like this down their throats, or by creating a supposed love story for the public’s consumption. Instead of trying to manage it, they would be better served to let things flow . . .
If he wrote anything in that occupation slot that wasn’t, ‘damned if either of us does anything’ it’s incorrect.
Gahhh! We are not on this again are we.
Read this article and you will be put straight by a royal expert and researcher, who regularly writes articles for Royal Magazines and often gives TV commentary on Royal events.
http://royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/british-titles-etc-rules-are-hard-and.html
oh gawd don’t take advice from the royalmusing site. She is NUTS. OVER tweets shit and stalks her opinion. total total weirdo
This is all a bunch of BS. The Queen bestowed William the Duke of Cambridge title to him upon his marriage – the Duke title is actually more “higher” in status than the Prince moniker. Therefore, being the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge is more meaningful at this stage of his life than Prince and Princess. When Charles becomes King he may then bestow a Prince of Wales title upon Prince George, probably not William. There is no fighting, this is protocol, and has been going on forever. Also, let go of Peter and Zara not having titles – Princess Anne and Mark Phillips decided TOGETHER not to let the Queen title their children. That was not a decision the Queen made on her own, she would gladly have given them titles of some sort.
In morganatic marriages the wife/concubine isn’t given a title because the nature of her birth makes her unworthy. Morganatic marriages occur when a prince marries a commoner. I can see why this would upset Prince William. The Palace is still insisting on the social divide between “noble” births and “commoner” or peasant births.
If the Queen didn’t want to give common as muck Kate a Princess title , it’s her business not William’s. When he becomes King he can give Kate and her horrid family imo, all th titles his little heart desires.
The Queen doesn’t make mistakes. William is only making things harder and harder for Kate inside the Palace, a reason I believe she mostly lives with her mom, is the Palace or Royals don’t kiss her butt like she expected and wants.
I think the reporter is the only real princess in this story. What a ridiculous hissy fit. Perfect for a Saturday Night Live skit.
What is not silly about this and quite revealing, I think, is the increasing evidence that british reporters (even previously super-loyal ones) have had it up to *here* with the bungling PR, archaic media restrictions and general double-standards imposed by the royal family.
Kate’s title might seem petty, but it’s perhaps a symbol of deeper frustration among british media who must play along, keep quiet and not publish what they know or photos they may have. They loyally abide by royal edicts (despite vague or conflicting direction) and feel foolish next to their international peers who take journalistic pride in exposing hypocrisy among the highest ranks. Maybe this is a sign of a tipping point… see also:
The evolving story on Prince Charles’ influence over government:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/12/prince-charles-scrutiny-mps-lobbying
And the April 2013 story on Queen’s pay raise vis a vis public service cuts:
http://rt.com/news/queen-pay-rise-funding-265/
Dominique I think you have a very good point. I think this issue is bigger than Kate’s title. I won’t be surprised if in the next few years the British press becomes more bold in exposing the truth about their Royal Family. After all that Royal baby glow will not last forever and when it ends, well all bets are off.
Dominique, you raise an excellent point. I do think this is the real, underlying issue. I’ve been wondering how close the British press are to losing patience, and if they are in fact reaching the tipping point, or if that’s just wishful thinking on my part.
I would love to hear LAK’s take on this as well.
Can’t they just make everybody a Disney Princess and call its day?
I think he put “Princess of United Kingdom” as her occupation simply because he put “Prince of United Kingdom” as his occupation. And i think he put that because that is what prince Charles used!! Does this make any sense to any one?
I find this fascinating, actually. If we take this literally (what’s written on the birth certificate) her JOB is princess, even if she’s not Princess Kate. Job does not equal title. Interesting.