How royals can be stripped of their titles – and what it could mean for succession
Prince Andrew will be stripped of his royal titles, meaning he will no longer be called “prince” or “His Royal Highness”.
The following statement was made by Buckingham Palace: “Her Majesty has today begun a formal process to remove Prince Andrew’s style, titles and dignity.
“Prince Andrew will now be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor […] Although he continues to deny the allegations against him, he sees these censorships as necessary. “Her Majesty would like to make it clear that her thoughts and utmost sympathies are with the victims and survivors of all forms of abuse and remain with them.”
The statement also said Andrew will need to leave his current home, Royal Lodge, and move into alternative private accommodation.
The moves follow allegations that Andrew continues to “strongly deny” surrounding his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
But how can a prince, who is the son of a queen, be stripped of the title of “prince”?
Here’s how it works and what it might mean for succession.
How do you actually strip a prince of his titles?
This is the ruler III. It is within Charles’ jurisdiction. The monarch issues an official document called a letter patent.
They are often used to grant a title or right, but this does the opposite: take it back from Andrew.
There are precedents for monarchs removing their titles in this way. When Diana and Charles divorced, she lost the use of the phrase “Her Royal Highness”, as did Andrew’s ex-wife Sarah Ferguson. So it doesn’t always have to be scandalous or unusual for a royal to lose their title.
However, what has not yet happened is that Andrew’s place as eighth in line to the throne has been removed as he does not fall within the king’s purview.
For this, parliamentary legislation needs to be made; And not just the Westminster parliament.
To do this, the Westminster parliament will need to introduce and pass a bill. However, this move would also require virtually identical legislation in all Commonwealth parliaments (Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc.).
This is not beyond the realm of possibility.
Just over a decade ago, in what became known as the Perth accords, Commonwealth parliaments agreed to change the rules on inheritance and gender. No longer will older princesses get ahead of their younger siblings for a place on the throne.
This happened very smoothly, so it is certainly possible for all Commonwealth parliaments to agree to coordinate on something. However, the Westminster parliament cannot instruct other parliaments to pass such laws.
So can all Commonwealth parliaments cooperate to remove Andrew from the line of succession? I haven’t seen this mentioned in media reports so far, but I would be very surprised if it didn’t happen in the future.
It seems incongruous that Andrew, despite losing his title, is still in line for succession.
But isn’t the queen’s son always a prince?
According to tradition, yes, the queen’s son is called a prince. But as we see, this title can be removed.
The best example of this was King Henry VIII in 1936. Edward abdicated the throne and lost his title as king in order to marry the divorced Wallis Simpson.
About the author
Cindy McCreery is Associate Professor of History at the University of Sydney.
This article was first published by. Speech and is republished under a Creative Commons license. Read original article.
After this, he was no longer entitled to the title “Royal Highness” and received a new title: Duke of Windsor. He had some prestige, but he no longer had the right to use the royal title.
Edward VIII (who was also Andrew’s great-uncle) had no children. But if they did, they would not be eligible to inherit the throne.
And this was not just a prince, but a real reigning king.
Taking action in a crisis
It was reported that Andrew accepted the final decision, but this decision was made by his brother the king.
This is a sign not only to the public, but also to his heir William, that Charles is doing all he can to pave the way for William to take the throne and to respond to public outrage over the allegations against Andrew.
As a historian, this is a good moment to consider that this is yet another example of the British monarchy taking decisive action in a moment of crisis to save the monarchy’s reputation and popular support.
Another example would be King George V, who acted decisively in World War I to not only strip the titles of family members who supported Germany in the war, but also to change his family’s name.
They were known as Saxe-Coburg Gotha (German name) but became the home of Windsor.
