Royal Dukes - Page 3

branchg · #41 11-16-2005, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marengo

Thanks Mapple. So the last thing you say means that the queen could use old, extinct dukedoms as Newcastle, Buckingham and Portland (now only an earldom) to her own family?
There is still a Marquess of Cambridge, isn't there? Would it still be possible to make another relative Duke of Cambridge?

As fount of honour, the Sovereign can grant any peerage that is extinct or create a new one. In practice, only royal peerages have been granted over the last seventy years since the extended royal family is much smaller than Victoria's time.

Lady Marmalade · #42 11-16-2005, 11:12 AM

Isn't the tradition with non-royal dukedoms is to grant them to aristocrats, or, members of an aristocratic family?

Example being, if the dukedom of Portland were to be revived, would not the Queen grant to a family member related to the man who had it last?

I find this thread very interesting and informative... :)

**Elspeth** · #43 11-16-2005, 01:12 PM

Life peerages are still granted, but hereditary peerages haven't been granted for some time now. The exception is that ex-Prime Ministers tend to be given earldoms.

btsnyder · #44 11-16-2005, 01:36 PM

Elspeth: I wasn't sure about that, but, of course, you are correct!

Anthony Eden - Earl of Avon
Harold Macmillan - Earl of Stockton
Alec Douglas Home, already the 14th earl of Home was created Baron Home of the Hirsel
Edward Heath - no peerage, anyone know why?
Harold Wilson - Baron Wilson of Rievaulx
James Callaghan - Lord Callaghan of Cardiff
Margaret Thatcher - Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven
Nothing yet for John Major - is it expected?

Also, in 1955, Churchill was offered elevation to dukedom as the first-ever Duke of London, a title he himself selected. However, he then declined the title after being persuaded by his son Randolph not to accept it. Since then, no people other than royalty have ever been offered a Dukedom in the United Kingdom.

**Elspeth** · #45 11-16-2005, 01:47 PM

Edward Heath stayed in Parliament until 2001; he wouldn't have been eligible to stand as an MP once he was made a peer in his own right, so I assume he declined a peerage while he still wanted to be an MP. Since he was a bachelor and had no children to pass a title to, it may simply be that a hereditary peerage wouldn't have meant much to him after his retirement.

According to Wikipedia, John Major has declined a peerage. Now that being made an Earl or Baron doesn't necessarily carry with it a place in the House of Lords, it may be less attractive to a retired politician.

btsnyder · #46 11-16-2005, 02:21 PM

Thanks, Elspeth. The Queen may be the fount of honour, but you are the fount of knowledge!

branchg · #47 11-16-2005, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade

Isn't the tradition with non-royal dukedoms is to grant them to aristocrats, or, members of an aristocratic family?

Example being, if the dukedom of Portland were to be revived, would not the Queen grant to a family member related to the man who had it last?

I find this thread very interesting and informative... :)

Well, new ones (i.e. Earl of Snowden) are only created for non-titled males who marry a senior female royal highness. All other peerages granted within the family have been created solely for Royal Highnesses, Highnesses or Serene Highnesses within the blood royal.

It is highly unlikely the Sovereign will ever grant a dukedom again to anyone outside the royal family.

kwanfan · #48 11-16-2005, 03:00 PM

Does the Queen hold the title of Duchess of Lancaster? And was she Duchess of Cornwall, while her father was King?

auntie · #49 11-16-2005, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwanfan

Does the Queen hold the title of Duchess of Lancaster? And was she Duchess of Cornwall, while her father was King?

Regarding the Duchy of Cornwall, it goes automatically to the first born son of the monarch, when his father/mother becomes king\queen. Crown princesses don't become duchesses of Cornwall, therefore the income from the duchy reverts back to the crown. In the presents queens case her father used the money to fund her household from when she became 18 years old untill her ascending the throne.

Lady Marmalade · #50 11-16-2005, 03:11 PM

Actually, funny enough, the Queen holds the title Duke of Lancaster...I am not sure why.

Hopefully someone could enlighten me?

Mapple · #51 11-16-2005, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade

Actually, funny enough, the Queen holds the title Duke of Lancaster...I am not sure why.

Hopefully someone could enlighten me?

Actually, she doesn't -- a sovereign cannot be a peer. :) 'Duke of Lancaster' is a local style for the British monarch.

branchg · #52 11-16-2005, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade

Actually, funny enough, the Queen holds the title Duke of Lancaster...I am not sure why.

Hopefully someone could enlighten me?

She only holds it as a style, "Her Majesty the Queen, Duke of Lancaster", while in the duchy on official business. As Sovereign, she cannot retain a peerage because she is the fount of honour and source of all enoblement.

branchg · #53 11-16-2005, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwanfan

And was she Duchess of Cornwall, while her father was King?

No, because she was not the eldest son of the Sovereign and heir to the throne. She was simply HRH The Princess Elizabeth (and Duchess of Edinburgh after marrying Prince Philip).

branchg · #54 11-16-2005, 03:31 PM

The Dukedoms of Albany and Cumberland remain valid styles for the current heads of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and House of Hanover. The Titles Deprivation Act applied only to the holders at the time and the current holders could petition the Crown for formal restoration to the peerage.

They haven't done this since none of them reside in England and their titles are only styles legally in Germany. But they remain Princes of the UK with the rank of Royal Highness as descendants of the Hanoverian sovereigns.

Mapple · #55 11-16-2005, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by branchg

The Dukedoms of Albany and Cumberland remain valid styles for the current heads of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and House of Hanover. The Titles Deprivation Act applied only to the holders at the time and the current holders could petition the Crown for formal restoration to the peerage.

They haven't done this since none of them reside in England and their titles are only styles legally in Germany. But they remain Princes of the UK with the rank of Royal Highness as descendants of the Hanoverian sovereigns.

I'm afraid that you are mistaken -- the present heirs to the dukedoms of Cumberland and Albany are not entitled to the title of Prince and the style of Royal Highness under the Letters Patent issued on 30 October 1917.

Lady Marmalade · #56 11-16-2005, 05:55 PM

Thank you. I already understood she is not a peer as the Duke of Lancaster.

But thank you for clearing it up for others who may not have known that..

Lady Marmalade · #57 11-16-2005, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by branchg

The Dukedoms of Albany and Cumberland remain valid styles for the current heads of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and House of Hanover. The Titles Deprivation Act applied only to the holders at the time and the current holders could petition the Crown for formal restoration to the peerage.

They haven't done this since none of them reside in England and their titles are only styles legally in Germany. But they remain Princes of the UK with the rank of Royal Highness as descendants of the Hanoverian sovereigns.

They are not allowed, nor do they use, the title in the Great Britain as styled "Prince of Great Britain and Northern Ireland".

They formally use only their German titles.

Those letters of patent from the early 20th century are still in effect today.

branchg · #58 11-16-2005, 06:34 PM

Formally and legally, the Hanovers or Coburgs are not allowed to use any royal title whatsoever because they are not recognized by the German Republic except as a style (i.e. Ernst-August, Prince von Hannover).

For royal protocol among the reigning and non-reigning houses, he is still recognized as HRH Prince Ernst-August, Duke of Brunswick, Duke of Cumberland and Prince of the UK. The Queen allows him to retain his style (not title) because he is the Head of the House of Hanover and a British subject. That's why he sought her permission to marry Princess Caroline.

Legally, he retains none of his peerages or British titles. They are simply a style.

Lady Marmalade · #59 11-16-2005, 06:40 PM

ahh....gotcha...

But, in the Court Circular, he would only be listed as HRH Prince Ernst August of Hanover, right?

If we would appear to be in there.....

I thought they were all stripped of their British citizenship as well.....when was that reinstated?

branchg · #60 11-16-2005, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade

ahh....gotcha...

But, in the Court Circular, he would only be listed as HRH Prince Ernst August of Hanover, right?

If we would appear to be in there.....

I thought they were all stripped of their British citizenship as well.....when was that reinstated?

Yes, he would. Ernst-August's father successfully won British citizenship by petitioning the High Courts under the Sophia Naturalization Act. After this legal victory, he also issued a royal decree that all members of the Hanover Royal House would continue to be styled as "Prince/Princess of Great Britian and Ireland".

Of course, this has no legal standing in the UK, but the Queen has not objected to the Hanovers using their British styles as descendants of King George III.