Unfortunately, IIRC the act providing for domestic partnership asserts that it has no bearing on royal or noble styles at all. If the domestic partner in question were to get a title, it would have to be granted by the monarch, as for the husband of a titled woman.
Ah, those were the days…
Frankly, it wouldn’t surprise me if Prince William turns out to be a deranged psychopath, like so many kings before him. That charming smile… that down-to-earth demeanor… that glint of good humor in his eye… wasn’t Ted Bundy like that?
As long as they keep him out of Whitechapel.
Ireland became a kingdom in the 16th century, so the title “Duke of Ireland” is impossible.
However it is sometimes the case that the royal prince receives on his wedding the titles “Duke of [somewhere in England]”, “Earl of [somewhere in Scotland]”, “Baron of [somewhere in Ireland]”.
I was going to make a joke about there being too few beheadings these days in the British monarchy. Then I remembered Princess Di.
The only couple to rule England(, Scotland and Ireland) and to both be considered Monarchs of the country were William III (William of Orange) and Mary II who ruled as co-monarchs.
I think one reason they’re remembered as that is to distinguish them from his other wives- Catherine Howard, Catherine Parr, and Anne Boleyne- as well as from many other queens named Catherine (e.g. Catherine of Valois for Henry V, Catherine of Braganza for Charles II, Anne Neville for Richard III, Anne of Denmark for James I & VI and his great-granddaughter Queen Anne [who was queen regnant though unlike her sister did not elect to have her husband made king]).
Re: spellings- Catherine and Katherine are interchangeable in medieval through 17th century spellings and you’ll sometimes see a Queen Catherine’s name spelled both ways in the same source. Looking at Catherine of Aragon’s signature I’m still not sure which way she spelled it but I think it’s with a K (which I think was the Spanish norm). The most famous thing about her signatures is that post separation and annullment she usually made a great big R for regina or reya as she absolutely refused to be addressed as “Catherine, Princess Dowager of Wales” (her official court title, leftover from her first husband, after Henry annulled their marriage).
A question regarding this:
There are references to “their most Catholic Majesties Queen Mary and King Philip of England” for the marriage of “Bloody” Mary and her Spanish kinsman, but to my knowledge he was never crowned. I have seen the title “Regum jure uxoris” (king by right of marriage) but apparently this had no real power in his case and was more like “King Consort” (if that’s a title). Likewise when he became King of Spain in his own right halfway through their marriage she does not seem to have been crowned queen nor does she appear on listings of that country’s queens.
Any idea what the details were in this marriage as far as titles were concerned? To my knowledge Mary never left the country while she was married to Philip and I’ve wondered if this is why she isn’t Queen Mary of England and Spain, but Philip did come to England several times.
The UK Royals did tend to drop those German titles in the early to mid 20th Century.
I’ve heard of that sort of thing being done for males who marry a member of the royal family, since for them the default outcome is that they don’t receive any titles or honors through the marriage. That doesn’t apply when it’s the bride who’s the commoner; she automatically receives the status and female equivalents of her husband’s titles. At least that’s how I thought it works in the UK.
I don’t understand why she would need a title of her own, but there’s probably some factor here of which I’m unaware.
The case of the King making his ‘favorite’ Duke of Ireland happened 300 years before that, in the 13th century.
But it would probably be impossible now.
Princess Mary of Teck was named Victoria Mary Augusta Louise Olga Pauline Claudine Agnes at birth so she certainly had lots of names to choose from when she became Queen Consort.
To expand a little bit, when a woman marries a man with a title, there’s no point in granting her a title because she automatically gets the man’s. Accordingly, the custom has been that when a royal who doesn’t already have a title or his of her own gets married, the groom is granted a title, whether he or the bride is the royal.
For example, just before the present Queen got married, her father granted her fiancé the title Duke of Edinburgh (which of course he still has), so she spent the few years between her marriage and her accession to the throne she was Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Edinburgh.
Likewise, Prince Edward was granted the title Earl of Wessex upon his marriage; accordingly, his wife became HRH the Countess of Wessex upon her marriage. There was no need to grant her a title of her own because she was about to get her husband’s. (Edward is apparently in waiting for the title of Duke of Edinburgh, which is why he was created an earl instead of a duke.) Prince Andrew was also created Duke of York upon his marriage.
Princess Anne’s first husband Mark Phillips was offered a peerage upon his wedding but turned it down. I’m not sure whether Anne would have continued to style herself HRH the Princess Royal in that case, or become HRH the Duchess of Wherever, or maybe HRH the Duchess of Wherever, the Princess Royal (she will remain Princess Royal for life).
Mary was the Queen consort of Spain, and did use the title “Queen of Spain” - along with Queen of England, Ireland, France, Jerusalem and Sicily. She was also an Archduchess of Austria and the Duchess of Burgundy, and several other places besides. With such a plethora of titles, you may imagine that most of them didn’t get used very often, except in a very formal way. Her regnal titles (England and Ireland) were of vastly more signficance than her titles in pretence (France) or her titles as consort (Spain and the rest), so they are the ones most used.
I’m glad you mentioned this. My understanding was there took place a conversation between just the Queen and her daughter in which the monarch suggested fitting out the new family member with a title, and it was Margaret who declined it, wanting to spare her kids the rigors of Royal life. 
(OK, undoubtedly there is a lot of tedium that goes with that, I’m sure. The pomp and ceremony, having to learn how to do that funny little hand wave, but I digress…) The way I heard it, Mark Phillips wasn’t part of this conversation.
Interestingly the two grown children of Margaret and Mark Phillips, untitled commoners though they are, do not lose their place in the succession to the throne. According to the Wikipedia article on the subject they hold the 11th and 12th places in the lineup. Or maybe it shouldn’t be surprising; if you believe in the idea of a hereditary monarchy, royal blood is royal blood whether you’re a duke or a commoner.
ETA: After a quick look at the individual Wikipedia article on Peter Phillips, I see I was mistaken about Mark Phillips not being a part of that discussion.
There’s precedent. When Princess Margaret married in 1961, her (commoner) husband was created Earl of Snowdon, and she became “HRH the Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon”.
At the time of her marriage, Anne was not the Princess Royal. (That title was not conferred on her until 1987.) She was simply HRH the Princess Anne and, if her husband had been granted an earldom she would have become HRH the Princess Anne, Countess of [Wherever]".
Mary II didn’t elect to have her husband made king; he claimed it himself, as he had Stuart blood from his mother (William and Mary were first cousins), and he led an invasion of England which resulted in James II fleeing.
The Convention Parliament offered the Crown to them jointly, and they jointly accepted it.
You don’t have to be crowned to be the Crown. Edward VIII, for example, was never crowned; Elizabeth II’s coronation was about a year after she ascended the throne. The coronation is pomp and ceremony, but not a legal prerequisite to exercising the royal authority.
I have read that when a titled Englishman’s widow remarries she can elect to keep her previous title and that many do, thus the widow of Lord Straitdope who next marries a Mr. Jackson may be formally introduced as “Mr. Jackson and Lady Straightdope, and their son Jimmy Jackson” as if they were just living together.
Margaret’s case is the same as the current Queen’s, whose husband was also given a title upon their marriage. The difference with Anne – or so I thought – was that she was Princess Royal. But of course she wasn’t at the time of her marriage; thanks for the correction, UDS.