There was some speculation that George was the regnal name most favored by him, in honor of his grandfather George VI, and George III, a monarch whom Charles has always held in high esteem. The name Charles of course is associated with the House of Stuart, displaced by the Hanoverians, so that might possibly count against it as a regnal name.
For military purposes, the princes use Wales as a surname -
Flight Lieutenant (William) Wales and Captain (Harry) Wales, respectively.
Si
[del]IIRC, I read that her husband, son of the Prince of Wales, was called “William Wales” on some of his military documents.[/del] (I spend so long writing my post si_blakely beat me to this.)
Some genealogists, who like to put surnames in all-caps, refer to Harry as Harry WINDSOR, but refer to his mother as ELIZABETH, Queen of U.K.
Noble ranking is ambiguous; and a title in its own right will often be considered more important than a familial title, even when the latter is “higher in rank.” Prince/princess are particularly ambiguous; for example these titles (though not Fürst / Fürstin) are sometimes applied to the children of German Grafs.
The present Queen’s father was made a Royal Prince when still a toddler, but was nevertheless often called the “Duke of York” before his brother chose love over duty.(*)
-
- If this were the Trivia Dominoes thread, I might mention that the distracting abdication occurred when Britain was debating its reaction to the Anti-Comintern Pact between Japan and Germany and, thus, might have affected British preparedness.
Andrew did.
She’s not a Princess, she’s a Prince’s daughter-in-law. Bear with me as i attempt to explain something I hardly have a grasp on myself, and forgive me as I mutilate the terminology.
William isn’t Prince in his own right. He’s the son of Charles, the Prince of Wales. The wife of the Prince of Wales is entitled to be called Princess, hence Diana, Princess of Wales. Their children are styled Prince William of Wales and Prince Henry of Wales until they receive titles of their own, which is what happened when William married and was created Duke of Cornwall. If they were to use his birth title, Prince William of Wales, then his wife would be known as Princess William of Wales.
If it plays out as it ought, then when Charles takes the throne, William will become William, Prince of Wales and Catherine will be able to be styled Catherine, Princess of Wales or Princess Catherine.
I think.
The children and grandchildren get to use Prince or Princess as an honorific, hence Prince Edward, Duke of Kent; Prince Richard, Duke of Glouchester, Princess Alexandra and Prince Edward of Kent. Since it is an honorific (to be pedantic it is a Royal Title) and not a title in its own right, it is not shared by a spouse.
So if Charles were not Prince of Wales, I believe it (technically) would have been Duchess Diana and not Princess Diana.
To further complicate things, Prince Charles’s current wife uses the title “Duchess of Cornwall” (he is the Duke) rather than “Princess of Wales,” since Diana held that title so prominently and it’s still so strongly associated with her. But Camilla is technically Princess of Wales.
She also goes by “Duchess of Rothesay” when they’re in Scotland.
So why, after Diana died, did they not become Prince William of Hearts and Prince Harry of Hearts? Or perhaps the People’s Princes?
“First” was not the first thing that came to mind when I saw the abbreviation “NFN.”
I think not. Because both Diana and Camilla were titled ladies before they met Charles; whereas Kate was a “commoner.” So Kate can only ever be “Princess William” unless the Queen or the next King grants her the title personally.
Actually, Camilla wasn’t: Queen Camilla - Wikipedia
Prince William was a commoner, until his gran made him a Duke. Yeah, I know it makes no sense.
Her legal name is Catherine. Just as Harry’s legal name is Henry, which is what I’m guessing he’ll be called when he becomes a duke.
As others have said: (1) She’s not a princess, and (2) Duchess is not a “lesser” title to princess.
Could even be “Carolus Rex” or “Carolus R.” if he decides to be very traditional, or rather “Georgius R.”
Awesome. I wonder if he ever gets this guy’s mail by mistake?
Nitpick: Prince William is the heir apparent, not the heir presumptive to the British throne.
The difference is that a heir apparent cannot be potentially superseded by the birth of somebody closer in line to the throne, whereas a heir presumptive can.
Frinstance, if Prince Charles were unmarried and had no children, his brother Prince Andrew would be the heir presumptive after him. But if Charles suddenly got married and fathered a child, Andrew would no longer be next in line.
Prince William, by contrast, cannot be displaced from his position as next in line to the throne after Charles, no matter what other offspring may pop up elsewhere in the line of succession. That makes him the heir apparent.
Actually, William is neither. Charles is the heir apparent.
I don’t know - maybe she wanted the change? It’s not unheard of for commoner women marrying commoner men to alter not just their surname but other bits upon marriage (seeing as in the US it’s a cheap, quick name change).
Ok, so the heir apparent to the heir apparent. 
Point still stands, nothing that Charles does now changes William’s #2 spot for the throne… bills of attainder notwithstanding presumably. :eek:
Nitpick: Charles and William are both heirs apparent. If Kate gives birth to a son there will be three heirs apparent. (IIRC, Britain has not yet adopted absolute primogeniture as some other European Kingdoms have, so if Kate’s first-born is a daughter, she would just be an heir presumptive.)
ETA: By definition, an heir apparent is anyone whose eventual succession can be prevented only by his death (or other personal disqualification.)
There children would use “Cambridge” as a courtesy surname just as William & Harry used Wales, and their cousines Beatrice & Eugenie use York.
Yep. Prince Charles & Princess Anne were both born with the surname Mountbatten because their mother was Queen yet and like evey other child born in wedlock they took their father’s name. Then their mother became Queen Elizabeth II and their uncle, the Earl Mountbatten of Burma started bragging that the “House of Mountbatten” was on the throne*. This pissed off the Queen Mother, who went to the Prime Minister who advised Elizabeth II to issue a decree confirming the name of the royal house as “Winsdsor” and changing her children’s surnames to Winsdsor. This made Prince Phillip feel “like a bloody amoeba”, so in 1960 she further decreed that all of her male-line descendants who didn’t have royal titles would be known as “Mountbatten-Windsor”; in practice even the ones with royal titles have used it on the rare occasions when they needed a surname.
Camilla never has a title before she married Prince Charles, and Diana was never legally “Princess Diana”; that’s something the media made up. You only get to put Princess in front of you own first name if you’re born one, or the monarch makes you one. “Catherine” isn’t part of the Duchess of Cambridge’s official style at all. Her full style & tile is “Her Royal Highness Princess William, Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn, Baroness Carrickfergus”, “HRH the Duchess of Cambrige” for short.
I don’t know what she signs her name as now, but Prince William’s legal signature is just “Cambridge” like other peers.
*He was a generation too early anyway. Traditionally a queen regnant remains part of her birth house even after marriage. Her children usually either belong to her consort’s house, or a new house name is created by combining the two. In either even the name of the royal house doesn’t actually change until she dies.