The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #201  
Old 08-12-2009, 05:27 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post
Queen Victoria didn't create Prince Alfred a Duke until 1866 when he was 22 years old, at which point, his elder brother, Edward, Prince of Wales, already had two sons, Prince Edward Victor, born in 1864, and Prince George, born in 1865, knocking Alfred to fourth in the succession.

Edward VII's first child was Prince Albert Victor not Edward Victor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_...e_and_Avondale

I have read that Victoria wanted to distance herself from her Hanoverian uncles and so didn't use York or Clarence for her sons and even avoided Kent (her own father's title) for any of her sons or grandsons. Kent doesn't get recreated until George V gave it to his fourth son over 100 years after the previous holder had died.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 08-14-2009, 04:06 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Grundisburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,993
Given time, I think the Duke of Clarence title will be used.
__________________

__________________
J
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 08-14-2009, 08:36 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
I don't know if Victoria really wanted to avoid the Hanoverian dukedoms. She created Clarence again as an Earldom for Prince Leopold when he was created Duke of Albany, then created it with Avondale as a Dukedom for Prince Eddy.

The last Duke of Clarence was her predecessor, William IV, who fathered illegitimate children like most of her uncles did and married common law wives without permission from George III.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 08-14-2009, 09:08 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post
I don't know if Victoria really wanted to avoid the Hanoverian dukedoms. She created Clarence again as an Earldom for Prince Leopold when he was created Duke of Albany, then created it with Avondale as a Dukedom for Prince Eddy.

The last Duke of Clarence was her predecessor, William IV, who fathered illegitimate children like most of her uncles did and married common law wives without permission from George III.

However she does wait until 1881 before using any of the titles associated with her uncles.

She could have been using them 20 years earlier.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 08-14-2009, 01:42 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monterey, United States
Posts: 2,324
I Wonder if Sussex or Cambridge Will ever be given again or the Depravation Act overturned or the 1999 H.O.L. Act?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 08-15-2009, 01:13 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,244
The House of Lords Act isn't going anywhere. If anything, it will probably be strengthened to totally remove hereditary peers.
__________________
TRF rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 08-23-2009, 08:35 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4
When the current Dukes of Kent and Gloucester die, their titles will revert to the crown(minus the lesser titles; eg Baron Downpatrick, Earl of Ulster, which have been given to the sons of the current dukes.They will revert upon the deaths of those holders) William and Harry's wives might be known as P'cess William and P'cess Henry until Kent and Gloucester become available. In that way the "pool" of royal Dukes is not widened and criticism is avoided.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 08-23-2009, 12:58 PM
Ella Kay's Avatar
Courtier
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Anywhere, United States
Posts: 952
I don't think those titles will revert at all, MichaelG. The Earl of St. Andrews will become the Duke of Kent (as will his son, Lord Downpatrick, after him) and the Earl of Ulster will become the Duke of Gloucester (and his son, Lord Culloden, after him). They won't be royal dukes with HRHs, but they will inherit the dukedoms.
__________________

"I have to be seen to be believed."
HM The Queen
Reply With Quote
  #209  
Old 08-23-2009, 01:23 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ella Kay View Post
I don't think those titles will revert at all, MichaelG. The Earl of St. Andrews will become the Duke of Kent (as will his son, Lord Downpatrick, after him) and the Earl of Ulster will become the Duke of Gloucester (and his son, Lord Culloden, after him). They won't be royal dukes with HRHs, but they will inherit the dukedoms.

Yes thats what I always thought.
Can however the titles be taken away from the Duke of Kent, Duke of Gloucester and Prince Michael of Kent?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #210  
Old 08-23-2009, 02:29 PM
Ella Kay's Avatar
Courtier
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Anywhere, United States
Posts: 952
I don't think so. And Prince Michael of Kent's title is his title from birth. He's the Duke of Kent's younger brother, so he didn't inherit any titles from their father when he died.

Titles aren't generally removed from people except in extreme situations (as when some dukes were deprived of their titles because they sided with Germany in WWI). And titles generally also only revert to the crown when there are no legitimate heirs left to inherit them.
__________________

"I have to be seen to be believed."
HM The Queen
Reply With Quote
  #211  
Old 08-23-2009, 04:50 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,602
The titles could be removed - if they commited treason but that is about all.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #212  
Old 08-24-2009, 02:34 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monterey, United States
Posts: 2,324
Could the Titles be reinvented say HRH Baron of Glouchester HRH Viscount of Kent and when HRH The Earl of Wessex gets his Father Title will he get his others too?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 08-24-2009, 04:48 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal Fan View Post
Could the Titles be reinvented say HRH Baron of Glouchester HRH Viscount of Kent and when HRH The Earl of Wessex gets his Father Title will he get his others too?

Under the 1917 Letters Patent the Gloucester and Kent lines cease to have the HRH prefix after the death of the current HRH's in those lines.

With the call the reduce the number of HRHs and the example set with Edward's children not using theirs there is virtually no chance that the HRH will be given to the Gloucester and Kent lines in the future (of course that assumes that something dreadful doesn't happen and the Gloucester or even Kent lines actually inherit the throne).

As for Edward - if he did inherit the title directly i.e. Charles, William, Harry and Andrew all predeceased Philip with no additional legitimate male heirs (meaning Beatrice becomes the Queen's heir) then Edward would inherit all of his father's titles.

As the more likely scenario is that Edward will have to wait until both the Queen and Philip are deceased and Charles (or possibly even William) is King then they will probably only issue LPs for the Duke of Edinburgh title itself as he already as an Earldom and a Barony - Wessex and Severn.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 08-24-2009, 04:51 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelG View Post
When the current Dukes of Kent and Gloucester die, their titles will revert to the crown(minus the lesser titles; eg Baron Downpatrick, Earl of Ulster, which have been given to the sons of the current dukes.They will revert upon the deaths of those holders) William and Harry's wives might be known as P'cess William and P'cess Henry until Kent and Gloucester become available. In that way the "pool" of royal Dukes is not widened and criticism is avoided.

Why do you think that the titles revert to the Crown?

Like all titles the LPs creating them allow for inheritance through the 'heirs male' and when George V gave those titles to his sons he knew that he had already changed the LPs in 1917 restricting the HRH to his male line grandchildren (through his sons only).

These titles will cease to be held by HRH when the current holder dies but they won't revert to the Crown. The current holders' heir will take those titles and pass them down - so at least two generations for both titles before they can revert as the current holders both have male line grandsons to inherit the title (with the added inheritance line for Kent of Prince Michael's line).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 08-24-2009, 05:03 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,167
Okay so let me get this straight.
When the DofE dies Edward wil not get the title immediately and it'll revert back to the crown so if Charles' king it'll belong to him?
And Edward can only recieve the title DofE if he's given it by Charles or William?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 08-24-2009, 05:11 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,602
In the normal course of events yes.

Due to the ages of the various people it is assumed that Philip will probably die first, in which case Charles becomes Duke of Edinburgh etc. The the Queen will die in which case Charles will become King and the Duke of Edinburgh title will merge with the Crown and, according to what was announced in 1999, Charles has agreed to regrant the title to Edward.

It is assumed that if William inherits the throne, rather than Charles, due to Charles predeceasing his mother, then the same arrangement will occur.

If the Queen dies before Philip then Charles will become King and still inherit the Edinburgh title when his father dies and again it is available for regrant.

If, Charles, William, Harry and Andrew all die before Philip then Edward would inherit the title directly.

If Charles and William die before the Queen and Philip but after William has a legitimate daughter (by no son) then the Edinburgh title would be inherited by Harry and not be available to go to Edward at all.

The same scenario above would apply if Charles, William and Harry all died with either William or Harry having a daughter but no sons as then Andrew would inherit the title directly and it would have to wait until Andrew died for it to become available (of course if Andrew remarried and had a son then that son would inherit that title - along with York).

In the normal course of events Charles will recreate Edward DoE at some time in the future and the title will pass to James and so on down.

But there are scenarios by which the title won't be available to reach Edward at all, or in which he could inherit it directly, although these are far less likely to occur.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 08-24-2009, 05:17 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,167

Thank you very much iluvbertie.

So what happens to Duke of York and Earl Of Wessex?
With DofY merge with the crown unless Andrew has a legitimate son?
Earl of Wessex will presumable go to James?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 08-24-2009, 06:46 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,602
Duke of York will revert to the Crown if Andrew doesn't have a legitimate son. (It can only merge if Andrew were to become King - semantics I know).
Wessex will go to James as he is Edward's legitimate son.
The only way either of the above don't happen is if Parliament, if and when it changes the law of succession to the Crown to allow gender blind succession were also to make all titles gender blind successsion, in which case Beatrice would inherit York and Louise Wessex (Edinburgh).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #219  
Old 08-25-2009, 06:46 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,167

Thank you. Iluvbertie, is there anyway that Charles can take away the title DofY or EofW from Edward and Andrew before they die?
And what about Princess Royal.

I'm just thinking because William could possible have children before Andrew, Edward and Anne pass away.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #220  
Old 08-25-2009, 07:14 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,602
No.

Andrew's title will probably revert as he has no sons but Edward does have a son so that title will pass to James.

William's children won't get those titles while Andrew and Edward are alive (the Princess Royal title can only go to the eldest daughter of the monarch and not during the lifetime of a holder so William couldn't create a daughter Princess Royal while Anne was alive but could do so the very next day - although I doubt if he would do that.)

The titles of Andrew and Edward have the remainder that they will pass to sons and there is no way to stop that. In time the Edinburgh/Wessex title should pass out of the hands of someone with the HRH, just as the Gloucester and Kent titles will do so with the next generation. The only way York doesn't revert is if Andrew has a son and as he isn't married and doesn't seem to be interested in remarrying that is highly doubtful.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
dukedom, royal dukes, styles and titles


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Royal Titles Zina Royal Family of Brunei 23 01-10-2014 01:11 PM
Royal, Princely and Comital Titles MAfan Royal Families of Italy 31 11-26-2011 04:30 AM
Moroccan Royal Names and Titles bjanka66 Royal Family of Morocco 61 07-05-2011 07:21 PM
Royal Titles Through the Generations IslandDweller Royal House of Norway 13 02-24-2008 09:26 AM




Popular Tags
abdication belgium birth brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess margriet princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:36 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]