Duke and Duchess of Cambridge?

[Paul Henry]

Whilst it's not technically correct to say Princess Kate, it's what I'm sure most people will call her, including yours truly. You can't be sent to the tower or beheaded for saying it, so what's the problem?

If she had married a Mr. William Wales, which in a sense she did, as that is the surname that Prince William actually uses as a member of the armed forces, she would not now be called Mrs. William Wales but Mrs. Catherine Wales, because the style of the wife using the husband's first name is entirely obsolete in England today, and has been for many, many years*, regardless of whatever anyone might say to the contrary. Anyone using that form of address would be laughed at. For this precise reason I would rather die than refer to her as Princess William, as to do so would be 'social death', whatever even the Palace may pronounce on the subject.

So, it is just as well she also has another title, as in the unlikely event that it was necessary to refer to HRH Kate (LOL!) in the presence of the Queen, for example, the only acceptable way out of the conundrum would be to refer to her as the Duchess of Cambridge. I have met Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, BTW, although never the Queen herself or any other member of the royal family, so the unlikely is not necessarily the impossible.

*ETA: Many, many years in this case meaning within my lifetime, and probably at least those of my parents, who are in their eighties.

My emboldening
It's not entirely obsolete, it's unusual perahps but I still know of many wives who are known as Mrs - husbands name,My mother generally prefers to be known in that fashion, although she is in her late seventies.
No one laughs at that form of address, and hardly social death either

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

My emboldening
It's not entirely obsolete, it's unusual perahps but I still know of many wives who are known as Mrs - husbands name,My mother generally prefers to be known in that fashion, although she is in her late seventies.
No one laughs at that form of address, and hardly social death either

Quite right.

Taking it to the level of the royals, correct form is HRH Princess Michael of Kent, not Princess Marie-Christine of Kent. The same would apply to HRH Princess William of Wales, Duchess of Cambridge.

Concerning the status of the Duke of Cambridge in Scotland, to the best of my understanding he would not use his subsidiary Scottish title, but would be correctly styled as "HRH Prince William of Wales, Duke of Cambridge"; the use of a subsidiary Scottish title (Duke of Rothsey) by the Prince of Wales as heir apparent to the Scottish throne is a situation unique to the independent nature of the Scottish kingdom that in no way effects his children or any other member of the royal family.

In so far as the dukedom of Clarence is concerned, the last member of the royal family to hold that title was King Edward VII's eldest son, Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence, who died in 1892, clearing the way for his younger brother to ascend the throne as George V.

[McClef]

I was thinking of Clarence standing alone in its own right when I referred to William IV's title before he inherited the throne MOR.

Albert Victor was "double barreled" so to speak as he was Clarence and Avondale.

You raise an interesting point about the use of Scottish titles in Scotland. Apart from Rothesay (and Edinburgh of course) I am not aware that Prince Andrew, for example, is anything but Duke of York rather than Earl of Inverness when in Scotland.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

I was thinking of Clarence standing alone in its own right when I referred to William IV's title before he inherited the throne MOR.

Albert Victor was "double barreled" so to speak as he was Clarence and Avondale.

As I recall William IV was actually Clarence and St. Andrews...

I rather think that the "aura" surrounding the last Duke of Clarence (and Avondale, ) would have mitigated against a current revival of that title.

[theborderer]

And here's the way they travelled from "Buck House" home

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ng-drive.html#

[O'Callaghan]

My emboldening
It's not entirely obsolete, it's unusual perahps but I still know of many wives who are known as Mrs - husbands name,My mother generally prefers to be known in that fashion, although she is in her late seventies.
No one laughs at that form of address, and hardly social death either

My family would find it downright quaint, and they would laugh at it. It's sexist as well.

[theborderer]

I had the privilege of meeting Her Majesty and family during a tour with the Royal Guard at Balmoral, even so far as the Duke of Edinburgh calculating the length of cable I would require for a Field Telephone I was laying.

[fluter]

My family would find it downright quaint, and they would laugh at it. It's sexist as well.

Hrmmm, what's sexist is the title "Mistress" itself, not so much its particular application. (he pontificated, pedantically )

In this country the usage "Mrs. Husband Surname" is correct, but almost extinct through simple ignorance. If in doubt, or if the lady does not choose to change her name, there is "Ms."---which in my part of the world, is generally pronounced the same as "Mrs." I.e. "mizz."

Regionally: Susan Jones, the wife of James Jones, is more frequently called "Miss Susan" than "Mrs. James Jones."

[longhuntr74]

In this country the usage "Mrs. Husband Surname" is correct, but almost extinct through simple ignorance.

There ya go...ignorance and lack of upbringing!

In fairness, I don't believe I've ever heard a lady referred to in spoken word by her husband's name. It is still considered proper (and commonly improperly done) to address invitations to weddings, balls, etc to Mr. and Mrs. (or Title/Rank and Mrs.) His Name....even in the US.

For example, when I receive an invitation to a Military Ball, it should be addressed to: Major and Mrs. Jeffrey Bavis. I've noticed, as of late, that invitations are not even sent out anymore (which is a shame). Apparently a powerpoint slide advertisement posting the date, time, and cost is considered an acceptable alternative these days....grrrrrr!!!!

What's my point? I think it's great to maintain etiquette, history, and tradition. Loss of respect is not considered progress in my book.