Princess Eugenie’s title upon marrying commoner Jack Brooksbank

By @chelean on

Princess Eugenie doesn’t mind that boyfriend Jack Brooksbank doesn’t have a title. It had been speculated that Queen Elizabeth might bestow the title of Earl of Northallerton to Brooksbank, but now it has emerged that he will instead remain a commoner.

The younger daughter of the Duke of York will be marrying her boyfriend of seven years on Oct. 12 this year at St George’s Chapel. The Queen was previously reported to be considering giving Brooksbank, 32, the earldom of Northallerton, which has been vacant for a long time. But a representative for the Yorks told the Daily Mail that Her Majesty has decided against it. Brooksbank will therefore remain a non-royal.

Although a member of one of the wealthiest families in Britain, Brooksbank isn’t royalty, and his marriage to the British princess would alter her name. She will retain her royal style and title but will drop her territorial designation, according to BBC. She will also have the option to take his surname. Following her wedding to her fiancé, Eugenie will be known as HRH Princess Eugenie, Mrs Jack Brooksbank.

Eugenie, 28, isn’t bothered by her soon-to-be husband’s lack of title. “Eugenie couldn’t care less about titles and is perfectly happy to be Mrs Brooksbank,” a source said, adding she even refused special treatment.

Brooksbank isn’t the first one to marry into the royal family who did not gain a title. It is believed that Princess Anne’s first husband, Mark Phillips, rejected a peerage from the Queen. And by rejecting it, his children with Anne — Peter and Zara Phillips — did not have courtesy titles as well.

Fergie defends Eugenie

Meanwhile, Eugenie’s mother, Sarah Ferguson, has come to the defence of her second daughter after a denigrating article on the Daily Mail questioned the engaged couple’s upcoming wedding. The piece, by controversial writer Jan Moir, complained that the royal wedding would be grandiose that would rival Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s.

“Despite being ninth in line to the throne and about as constitutionally important as one of the Queen’s corgis, the 28-year-old princess clearly has her heart set on a full-throttle, trumpet-tooting, extravaganza, complete with all the royal trimmings,” she wrote.

The article was deemed too mean-spirited by many readers, who defended the princess for getting a wedding befitting someone her status. The royal family will be paying for the event, though the security cost needed to orchestrate something that big would be provided by the public.

Fergie, who is divorced from Prince Andrew, shared a letter penned by Sarah Wade, the CEO of the organisation Humanitas Charity, in defence of Eugenie. In the letter, Wade questioned the purpose of Moir’s vitriolic article, calling the piece “inflammatory and divisive.”

Eugenie’s mum couldn’t agree more. She called the article “disgusting.”

 

 

#Repost @antoniamarshall ・・・ Couldn’t agree more with this letter about the disgusting article that Jan Moir wrote about @princesseugenie and Jack. Bullying at its’ premium and hiding behind a newspaper commenting about people you’ve never met @dailymail @the.independent @cnn @metro.co.uk @dailymirror #bullying #abuse #dailymail #janmoir @ariannahuff @evening.standard @hellomaguk #standupfoundation #media #press #journalists @bbcnews @itvnews @skynews

A post shared by Sarah Ferguson (@sarahferguson15) on Jul 25, 2018 at 6:54am PDT

 

This isn’t Moir’s first article that attracted widespread criticism. Several of her articles have been deemed too spiteful. One of her most infamous ones was an article about late Boyzone member Stephen Gately. She claimed in her 2009 article in the same publication that Gately’s death was not of natural causes, despite the conclusion of the coroner’s report, and that it was linked to his homosexuality.

Join the Discussion