This week it was announced that the Queen's second son, Prince Andrew, would be stripped of his remaining military honours and royal patronages, while at the same time a royal source revealed he would also no longer be using his HRH styling. It is the second time that the issue of being His or Her Royal Highness has become a news headline in recent years, after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex agreed to stop using their HRH styling as part of their Megxit agreement in 2020 (although they do technically retain it). But what does it mean to be HRH? And why is it significant that Andrew has lost it?
First, a history lesson. The use of His or Her Royal Highness began in the 17th and 18th centuries, according to History Extra: ‘It was encouraged in an era when dynastic reproduction was often precarious (because many royal babies died in infancy) and when succession wars could be devastating.’ It was particularly popular on the Continent, in order for younger sons of superior ruling families (such as the Bourbons or the Habsburgs) to distinguish themselves from lesser ones (such as the leaders of states like Tuscany or Bavaria). It's essentially a way of saying, ‘this prince or princess is more senior than another’.
Yet now, with a healthy birthrate and a proliferation of royal family members, there is no longer a need to rise up certain members - in fact quite the opposite. There's a desire to instead slim down the monarchy, and reduce the number benefitting from HRH status.
For example, you need to be HRH in order to draw money from the Sovereign Grant, although not every HRH has the privilege, with the line drawn at the children of Prince Andrew, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, who are 10th and 12th in line to the throne. This money is a kind of salary for working Royal Family members, who cannot otherwise hold other jobs.
Losing HRH status also means that you are not entitled to private security funded by the monarchy, and that people no longer have to bow or curtsy in your presence. For some, having no HRH status is an advantage, as it allows one to lead a more normal life, away from the Royal Family. Thus was the argument of the Earl and Countess of Wessex, who chose not to use the styling for their children, Lady Louise Windsor and James, Viscount Severn, despite being entitled to do so.
During Queen Victoria's reign, she began to limit which of her royal relatives could be styled as HRH, with various hanger-on cousins and uncles who were draining the royal purse. In 1917, King George V clarified things further, reducing the number of HRH family members to just the children and male-line grandchildren of the monarch, and the eldest grandchild of the heir to the throne. The Queen changed this in 2012 ahead of the birth of Prince George, with him and his siblings (regardless of gender) also entitled to the styling.
In recent history, there have only been two other members of the Royal Family to be completely stripped of their HRH status: the first was Diana, Princess of Wales, upon her divorce from Prince Charles in 1997, and the second was Sarah, Duchess of York, when she divorced Prince Andrew in 1996. The law was changed via a Letters Patent in 1996 to stipulate that any royal wives would lose their HRH status upon divorce. Diana's loss of HRH was particularly controversial, and was allegedly the cause of much distress for the late princess.
Meanwhile, only one royal wife has been denied the title: the Duchess of Windsor. While it would have been protocol for her to be styled as Her Royal Highness upon her marriage to the duke, she was denied the styling by King George VI, who reportedly argued that the duke himself had given up the privilege upon abdicating, but that he as his brother would make a concession.
