Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
8:10 pm
October 31, 2010
Offline
Is Sarah Ferguson still the Duchess of York?
If she is, does that mean anything? Or is it just sort of honorary at this point?
The Royals confuse me sometimes.
"We mustn't let our passions destroy our dreams…"
8:59 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
yup! she is according to wikipedia…http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S…..h_Ferguson
Sarah Ferguson's full style during her marriage was Her Royal Highness The Princess Andrew Albert Christian Edward, Duchess of York, Countess of Inverness, Baroness Killyleagh.
Immediately after her divorce she retained the style Her Royal Highness; however on 21 August 1996 letters patent were issued which removed the style from divorced ex-wives of princes, paving the way for her to retain “Duchess of York
It's always bunnies.
8:38 am
February 24, 2010
Offline
Sarah loses the title if she remarries someone else. What happens if Andrew remarries? Would there be a Sara, Duchess of York, and The Duchess of York? 
9:19 am
November 18, 2010
Offline
I'm not sure. I know Camilla took a cadet title when she married Charles partly because it was a Morganatic marriage and partly to placate Diana supporters.
I have a feeling an second wife of Andrew would do a similar thing even though there's not as much support for Sarah as there was for Diana.
It's always bunnies.
11:37 am
February 24, 2010
Offline
Anyanka, thank you. American English here…LOL…I had no idea what you meant and had to look Morganatic marriage up. Still do not know what a cadet title is though?
12:24 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
Cadet title is a lower rank of title, so in Prince Charles case he is the Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall and various other titles. Camilla has taken Duchess of Cornwall and is supposed to take the title Princess Consort when/should Charles come to the throne.
It's always bunnies.
12:08 pm
February 24, 2010
Offline
Thanks!
2:30 pm
October 31, 2010
Offline
Can't we skip Charles and go straight to William or something?
"We mustn't let our passions destroy our dreams…"
8:05 pm
November 18, 2010
Offline
At the moment the line of succession goes Charles,William, Henry, Andrew, his daughters, Edward, his son,daughter, Anne, Peter Philips, his daughter, Zara Philips…Margeret's descendants
We can only skip Charles if 1) he dies before Queen Elizabeth or 2) he abdicates.
Given Queen Elizabeth , the queen dowager lived until she was over 100.., QEII potentially has another 15 or so years before she reaches 100*, Charles dying first becomes stastically possible. If Charles does succeed, I doubt he would abdicate unless due to ill-health…
* Since Queen Elizabeth, the queen dowager,got a telegramme from her daughter on reaching 100,who would send a telegramme to Queen Elizabeth when she reaches 100??
It's always bunnies.
9:49 pm
January 9, 2010
Offline
Possibly the only person who doesn't get one – or whatever it is they send these days instead of telegrams!! My grandmother always wanted a telegram from the Queen but sadly she missed out by three years.
But I think Prince Charles will make a good king; he has some mad ideas and the most interesting monarchs are always a little different 
6:49 pm
October 31, 2010
Offline
wreckmasterjay said:
I have noticed several comments in the newspapers recently that due to the scandals that the Duchess keeps somehow getting herself into, she should be stripped of her Royal title (along with her ex husband) due to the fact she has never ceased to cause embarrassment for the Royal Family.
What do you think?? Should she/they be stripped of their titles???
I was kind of surprised to find out that she still HAD a title BECAUSE of her behavior….
Then I remember that a lot of other people who had titles did things just as bad if not worse and got away with it scot-free in the past. I think they're doing the only thing they know how which is to basically shun her. If I understand correctly, she was not invited to the wedding–correct?
"We mustn't let our passions destroy our dreams…"
9:36 pm
January 9, 2010
Offline
No she wasn't. Can someone enlighten me – what is that she's supposed to have done this time? Sorry, I don't really follow the misadventures of Sarah Ferguson!
5:19 am
June 7, 2010
Offline
Frankly if the Duchess of York was at the wedding, it would make is exciting. One never knows what she's up to. I remember reading a few things about her in the UK news lately.
She did try to sell access to Prince Andrew. It turned out to be a sting by a newspaper. She looked rather bad after that.
Recently, she and Andrew were caught in a scandal involving money and a convicted sex offender. Sarah apparently took money from him because she is always in financial trouble.
I wonder if the Royals just did not want the unwanted attention of Sarah, and decided to not invite her. Since she is no longer married to Andrew, it was not against protocol to leave her off the guest list.
But, it must be hard for her daughters to strike a happy medium with loving their mother and their royal roots. Then again, the Royals are a strange breed. Not a family I would want to marry into. Good luck Miss Middleton. I hope you survive, but I have my doubts.
However, if I had an embarrassing aunt by marriage (and now divorced from my uncle), I might not invite her to my wedding either.
As for her not holding the title Duchess of York. I'm of the opinion that: it was a title by marriage, so when they divorced, she should have been made to relinquish the title, too. I am sure many would disagree.
"By daily proof you shall find me to be to you both loving and kind" Anne Boleyn
6:13 am
November 18, 2010
Offline
Part of the problem was the royal family allowed Diana to keep her title because of the support from the press and the public. So to remove Sarah's title would have looked unfair at the time.
Royal etiquette is very different from normal etiquette. This wedding is hosted by the Queen rather than the bride's family. But in any case, married couples should normally be invited as should couples who are engaged or in a LTR*. Divorced couples are more problematic. Unless there is a very good reason the non-family divorced member should be invited, it's not unusual for them to be excluded.
* One of the problems with the wedding is that several of William's flight have been invited solo which caused a minor stink in the press, IIRC.
It's always bunnies.
