Post by Renia Post by John Briggs Post by Renia Post by John Briggs Post by Renia Post by John Briggs
What do you mean by "of course"? Which bit of "Lady Louise
Windsor" and "HRH Princess Louise of Wessex" does not involve a
Lady Louise Windsor.
It's not a title.
"Lady" is not a title? Silly me! (As you have already demonstrated
that "Windsor" is not her surname, it should also be considered as
part of the title - like "de Arundel".)
Heather Mills-McCarney is a Lady. She has no title of her own. She
has the STYLE of "Lady", by virtue of her (present) husband being a
knight. He also has no title.
Lady Louise Windsor has the STYLE of "Lady" because her father is an Earl.
However, she is entitled to a superior style, that of Princess,
because her father is also a Prince and chose that his daughter
would have the style of Princess. Thus, she is Princess Louise of
I think you are drawing "title" too narrowly (by excluding both
courtesy titles and some legal titles).
You are confusing titles with styles of address.
Well, you are the one who is claiming that courtesy titles are not titles...
Post by Renia Post by John Briggs
For a start, some styles are legal titles - and I think Princess
Louise falls in to this category, as she is a Princess of the United
Kingdom in her own right. (It is nothing to do with what her father
decided - he decided *not* to style her "Princess Louise", but he
doesn't issue Royal Warrants! The title "Prince" or "Princess" is
borne by children of the sovereign, and by the children of sons of
the sovereign.) The styles of wives of peers are also legal titles,
despite not being
substantive peerages. [I'm not absolutely sure if that applies to
"Lady X" as well as "Viscountess X" for the wife of a viscount.]
Similarly with the wives of knights, but the wrinkle here is that
the style of the legal title is Dame Heather McCartney - Lady
McCartney is, strictly speaking, a courtesy title rather than a
legal one - but it is usually treated as if it were the legal title.
There is a difference between titles and the style by which persons
are known. The spouse of a titled person (usually a wife) is styled
according to that spouse's rank. Sometimes, the wife or spouse has a
higher rank by which they would both be styled.
"By which they would both be styled"? Have you taken leave of your senses?
And which is the style and which the title: "Viscount" or "Lord"?
Post by Renia
Princess Michael is a princess by right of her husband, hence she is
not known as Princess Marie-Christine. Rather like old-fashioned
envelopes or invitations, where a wife was addressed or styled as Mrs
John Briggs, for example.
You are now confusing rank with title. She is styled Princess Michael
because of her husband's rank, rather than because of his title.
Post by Renia
Neither Lady McCartney nor her husband possess a title. He is a knight
and entitled to use the style, Sir. By right of her husband, Heather
Mills-McCartney is entitled to use the style, Lady.
You are not going to get away with claimimg that a knight does not have a
Post by Renia
The wife of a Baronet is styled "Lady", by right of her husband
(unless she possesses a higher rank of her own). The wife of a Knight
(which is a decoration, not a title) is styled "Lady" followed by the
knight's surname, in our example's case, McCartney. She is not Lady
Heather McCartney, she is Lady Paul McCartney, but his forename is
excluded from the style, thus, she is Lady McCartney.
A masterly analysis, but completely wrong. As I explained (patiently) the
legal title of a wife of a knight is "Dame Heather McCartney", but that is
never used (except in legal documents - quite possibly including divorce
proceedings), and instead the style (or quite possibly courtesy title) "Lady
McCartney" is employed instead.
The idea that knighthood is a decoration, not a title, is complete bollocks.
You are now confusing decorations of orders, with ranks and titles!
Post by Renia
My great-grandmother was a "Lady" by right of her husband. Some
documents refer to her as "Dame", but I believe that is more of a
fashion than a correct style. My ancestor was an Archbishop, and his
wife was referred to as "Dame" when really, she was a simple "Mrs".
Queen Elizabeth I had the same problem of not knowing how to address the
wife of an archbishop... (She disapproved of married clergy!)
In Canterbury Cathedral you will see the tomb of Cardinal Odet de Coligny -
he had died (or been murdered) while in England. He had become a Huguenot,
and married. The French were at somewhat of a loss as to know how to
address his wife. They tried "Madame la Cardinale", but it didn't sound
right. So they settled on "Comtesse de Beauvais". [He was Count-Bishop of
It is quite possible that your ancestor was a knight. As a clergyman, he
could not use the style (or title) "Sir". (I suppose he had to be content
with the decoration...) But his wife would still have the style, title ,
rank or decoration..
Interestingly, this does not apply to clergymen who are baronets -
presumably this really *is* a title rather than a mere decoration... At any
rate, they quite happily use the style (or possibly title...) "Sir".
Martha insisted on being addressed as "Lady Washington"...