Talk:Princess Royal

message: FearÉIREANN\(caint) 21:17, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: ''removing six month old, un-acted on proposal''.

message: It's my understanding that it's really not "custom" that dictates a princess being given the title of Princess Royal.  It's more of an honor bestowed for services given to the crown.  In Princess Anne's case, for example, The Queen gave her the title of Princess Royal for her many years of charitable work.
:Hmm ... that would make sense, as, for example, Princess Anne didn't become Princess Royal immediately after Princess Mary's death.  But, I don't know anything about it, either  Nik42 06:37, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Then again, Princess Victoria was given the title at the age of one, and it's hard to imagine what a one-year-old could do to earn an honor ... :-) Nik42 06:44, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: misc

message: Is there a specific rule that an heir presumptive will not be made "Princess Royal"?  I notice that none of the "queens regnant" (since the first time the title was given) have previously been Princess Royal but it is difficult to tell whether that is the "rule" or just dictated by circumstances.  Queen Elizabeth could not have been made Princess Royal before she ascended the throne in any event, because her Aunt Mary was still alive (and therefore still Princess Royal.)  Queen Victoria was not the daughter of a monarch so that would have ruled her out as well. Zeutron 16:39, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: * Princess Victoria, Princess Royal, the daughter of Queen Victoria was the heiress presumptive until the birth of King Edward VII. She was created Princess Royal the same year as his birth, but I don't know the creation date so I can't tell if she was both at the same time. Astrotrain 13:14, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Why Princess Elizabeth is not Princess Royal? Astorknlam 13:06, 10th November 2005 (UTC)
: Because between 1936 and 1952, when she was the king's daughter, her aunt Mary (Countess of Harewood) had the title.  —Tamfang 06:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Two reasons: 1) the title of Princess Royal was not used until the mid-17th century, after her death, and 2) she was never the eldest living daughter of the reigning king anyway (Mary I of England was). Biblioteqa (talk) 21:54, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Why

message: Why Princess Elizabeth not a Princess Royal? she was the eldest daughter to Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn? and anne was a monarch of england, see Anne, Queen of England.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.186.156.179 (talk) 17:29, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Two reasons: 1) the title of Princess Royal was not used until the mid-17th century, after her death, and 2) she was never the eldest living daughter of the reigning king anyway (Mary I of England was). Biblioteqa (talk) 21:54, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Why2

message: "The style is held for life," but for three of the seven examples the tenure is shown ending during her lifetime.  Is that when she acquired another title by marriage, or what?  —Tamfang 06:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: life tenure

message: This article is too Anglocentric!  The title was created in the 1600s when both the Crown of Scotland and England were in personal union, so the title can be as much Scottish as English.  I'm going to add the eldest daughters of Scottish kings.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 22:53, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anglocentric 

message: The image used in the lead is of inferior quality to the one used on Anne, Princess Royal (File:Princesa Ana do Reino Unido.jpg). The current image does not show the full face of Princess Anne and is overall too large. I'd just like to verify that isn't a reason why that one can't be replaced.Thanks--George2001hi (Discussion)  09:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead image? 

message: The article currently says "sleeping with the king's eldest daughter". This is a mere euphemism for "having sex with the king's eldest daughter." Wikipedia would be better without such prudish euphemisms. We needn't be gross about it, but let's call a spade a spade, eh?
Floozybackloves (talk) 18:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prudishness 

message: I removed the following from the article: "The Princess Royal - abandoned town in the USA, was named after the princess Royal Victoria. As her relative struck the highest riches in that area and the area profoundly became a town but was classified as abandoned in 1924 after all residence had left and buildings were in unlivable conditions." I've searched but cannot find any mention of an American ghost town by this name (there is one in Australia). If anybody finds good info on this, please add it back. Biblioteqa (talk) 20:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghost town 

message: This is not an article about the eldest daughters of English, Scottish and British monarchs, but an article about the title of 'Princess Royal', first used in England in the 17th century, following the style of the French title Madame Royale. Whilst it would be useful to have some mention of eldest daughters prior to this, three lengthy lists are not needed. For now, I have removed this - if anyone objects, I'll revert and discuss. Sotakeit (talk) 08:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Eldest Daughter of the Monarch

message: I have removed the recently added "The Daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, as the eldest daughter of a future monarch, would be the next eligible for the title, upon the death of her great-aunt and her father's ascension to the throne.". The title inherited so there is no line of succession, per se. Is "Princess X of Cambridge would be eligible for the title IF her father inherits throne and IF he choses to confer the title upon her on the death of The Princess Anne"? Princess Beatrice would be eligible for the title IF Charles, William, George and Harry died and Princess Andrew became king and he, upon Anne's death, created her Princess Royal - all this supposition isn't relevant. Sotakeit (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Princess X of Cambridge

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Princess Royal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page5660.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:57, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: : [emphasis added]
This latest addition implies that a PR has precedence over a Queen consort; is that accurate?  It is not supported by Orders of precedence in the United Kingdom. —Tamfang (talk) 18:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think this implied anything of the sort; I would interpret "although purely honorary" to mean this title has no bearing whatsoever on precedence, and indeed the article you linked lists the sovereign's daughters 6th in line amongst female royals. "Just under Queen regnant" would still be wrong though because it suggests Queen Regnant is a purely honorary title as well when it is far from it. The current language, "Although purely honorary, it is the highest honour that may be given to a female member of the royal family." still feels confusing to me; I think explicitly defining an "honorary title" would help.  Walkersam (talk) 19:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Upon further reading, would not courtesy title be the appropriate term here? Walkersam (talk) 20:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  precedence