Royal Dukes, Royal Duchies and Royal Ducal Titles

[Marsel]

Apart from Cambridge, another Dukedom that was seriously considered for Edward was, I believe, of Sussex.

Just a theoretical question: could the “Dukedom” and “Marquisate” of Cambridge exist simultaneously? Both titles are extinct. Or are they essentially the same?
I know they never 'existed' together: the last Duke of Cambridge (Prince George, the son of Prince Adolphus, himself the son of George III) died more than 10 years before the first Marquise of Cambridge (Adolphus, Duke of Teck – Queen Mary of Teck’s brother, who was created Marquise of Cambridge in 1917, after relinquishing his German titles).

[lac2003]

England may not have shopped around for monarchs, but they didn't exactly follow the direct lines when Henry VII almost literally picked up the throne and when William III was invited to hop on over from Holland.
Aren't there something like 60 or 70 people who actually have a more direct claim to the British throne than Elizabeth II? (and this is from the Plantaganet claimants, not the branch from James II/VII)
Things will certainly be interesting if the Duke of Edinburgh dies before the Queen and Charles claims the title over the wishes of his mother. Queen Elizabeth doesn't strike me as the type who takes kindly to dissent in the ranks!

[branchg]

Originally Posted by Marsel

Apart from Cambridge, another Dukedom that was seriously considered for Edward was, I believe, of Sussex.

Just a theoretical question: could the “Dukedom” and “Marquisate” of Cambridge exist simultaneously? Both titles are extinct. Or are they essentially the same?
I know they never 'existed' together: the last Duke of Cambridge (Prince George, the son of Prince Adolphus, himself the son of George III) died more than 10 years before the first Marquise of Cambridge (Adolphus, Duke of Teck – Queen Mary of Teck’s brother, who was created Marquise of Cambridge in 1917, after relinquishing his German titles).

Yes, it can happen. Clarence was created as an Earldom for HRH The Prince Leopold in 1881, together with The Dukedom of Albany, and then Queen Victoria created it as a Dukedom, together with Avondale, for Prince Eddy in 1890.

[Marsel]

Thank you, branchg!

If William and Harry marry within the next few years, the Cambridge and Sussex Dukedoms will probably be among the most likely titles to be created for them.
It is quite a pity that so many other historical and important titles are now suspended though: neither used, nor available for re-creation!

[branchg]

I think it's very possible William and Harry will not be created Dukes if they marry while their grandmother is alive. In keeping with a more "modern" and downsized monarchy, she may choose to create them Earls, knowing Charles could elevate Harry to a dukedom once he is King (William will automatically become Duke of Cornwall).

If she does, I agree Cambridge or Sussex are strong possibilities, but they could also be created something entirely new as well.

[wbenson]

Originally Posted by lac2003

Things will certainly be interesting if the Duke of Edinburgh dies before the Queen and Charles claims the title over the wishes of his mother. Queen Elizabeth doesn't strike me as the type who takes kindly to dissent in the ranks!

In that circumstance, Charles will get the title regardless of his wishes or the wishes of the Queen. (I suppose he could disclaim it, but I don't see why he would do that. It wouldn't be available to be re-granted.)

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by lac2003

England may not have shopped around for monarchs, but they didn't exactly follow the direct lines when Henry VII almost literally picked up the throne and when William III was invited to hop on over from Holland.
Aren't there something like 60 or 70 people who actually have a more direct claim to the British throne than Elizabeth II? (and this is from the Plantaganet claimants, not the branch from James II/VII)
Things will certainly be interesting if the Duke of Edinburgh dies before the Queen and Charles claims the title over the wishes of his mother. Queen Elizabeth doesn't strike me as the type who takes kindly to dissent in the ranks!

The Queen is fully aware of the Letters Patent that were used by her father to create her husband Duke of Edinburgh.

Namely that it would be inherited by the 'heirs male of his body'.

She hasn't changed the LPs (and would need an Act of Parliament to do so). She isn't about to deprive her eldest son of one of his rights - the right to inherit his own father's title.

The announcement at the time of Edward's marriage was very clear as seen in this report from the BBC at the time BBC NEWS | Special Report | 1999 | 06/99 | royal wedding | Wessex titles for Edward and Sophie

It has also been agreed that Edward will also become Duke of Edinburgh after the death of his mother, the Queen, and his father, Prince Philip, who currently holds the dukedom.

Note that this states that both Edward's parents have to die before he gets the Edinburgh title meaning that Charles will inherit it from his father and then regrant it to Edward. It will merge with the crown when Charles becomes King and both his parents are dead and until then it won't be available to Edward.


The Wikipedia article says the following: Duke of Edinburgh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was announced in 1999, at the time of the wedding of Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, the youngest son of Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, that he would eventually follow his father as Duke of Edinburgh.[1] However, the process by which this might happen is not simple, and will almost certainly not involve Edward directly inheriting the title from his father. Like any normal dukedom, the present Dukedom of Edinburgh passes to the heirs-male of the first duke, and Edward is currently fifth in this line of succession, following his two older brothers and his two nephews.
Rather, when the present duke dies, the dukedom will be inherited by his eldest son, Charles, Prince of Wales (or his heir, if he is deceased). If Charles is not yet king when this occurs, he would add "Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich" to his own list of titles. Only after Charles (or his heir) has both inherited the title of Duke of Edinburgh and ascended the throne would the present creation merge in the crown.
Presuming that there is no intention to call a new creation of the Dukedom into being while the current remains active, then, Edward will not be created Duke of Edinburgh until after the death of both his parents. At that point in time the monarch of the day (although in no way legally bound to do so) will presumably carry out the announced scheme.

[Ella Kay]

Originally Posted by branchg

I think it's very possible William and Harry will not be created Dukes if they marry while their grandmother is alive. In keeping with a more "modern" and downsized monarchy, she may choose to create them Earls, knowing Charles could elevate Harry to a dukedom once he is King (William will automatically become Duke of Cornwall).

If she does, I agree Cambridge or Sussex are strong possibilities, but they could also be created something entirely new as well.

This is a definite possibility after Edward's earldom. But I tend to think that William would get a dukedom anyway, because of his proximity to the throne, while Harry might get an earldom.

I like Cambridge for William, myself.

[lac2003]

"heirs male of his body"
In what century do these people live?!! And people wonder why the public feel that the royal family is out of touch with real life!!
Luckily, the average British person on the street couldn't care less who gets which title, except for King and Queen, and even there, people are pretty relaxed about things these days.
Dukes and the like only seem to matter to those who have a title, or would really like to have one.
How about Duke of St. Andrew for William and Duke of Sandhurst for Harry? Making new ones would take away all the possibilities of who had the title in the past and who could claim it now!
Even with a current Earl of St. Andrew, there are titles out there in both forms. The Duke of Sutherland and the Earl of Sutherland have been held by different people at the same time, so the precedent is there.
Gloucester and Kent look like they won't be back in the market anytime soon, and as people seem to think that Albany might be contested by someone in Germany (who has a Nazi sympathiser for an ancestor, charming), then I say, make a bunch of new ones and have fun with it!

[wbenson]

It's not up to the Queen to change that, though, so anyone who used that to make a determination that the royal family is out of touch with real life would be quite uninformed. (I know for certain that she can't amend letters patent already issued. I don't know if new ones issued in the future can be written so that they go to the oldest child regardless. I believe it would require an order-in-council (i.e. the permission of the government) to change this order, which sets out the form letters patent creating peers shall take.)

Edit: There is a note for the letters patent creating Dukes, stating "This form may be varied as required for the insertion of special remainders or any special grants directed by Her Majesty's commands," so she could, I believe, grant future peerages that are inherited without regard for sex. I don't think she would do this unless the throne was inherited in a like manner, though.

[branchg]

It's entirely up to The Sovereign as to whether a Peerage is created with a remainder to the female line. If originally created to pass through "heirs of male body", it can be re-created to include the female line, as Queen Victoria did with the Dukedom of Fife.

For example, The Queen could re-create The Dukedom of York to pass to her granddaughters, Beatrice and Eugenie, since it's unlikely that Andrew will remarry and have a son. If not, the Dukedom is extinct with Andrew's death.

[lac2003]

Does anyone really think that the Queen would ever consider changing the rules so that the York title would pass to either of Andrew's daughters? There was talk of quietly removing their HRH's at some point in the future, so I think the York title will pass from Andrew to whoever is 2nd in line to the throne when Andrew dies.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by lac2003

Does anyone really think that the Queen would ever consider changing the rules so that the York title would pass to either of Andrew's daughters? There was talk of quietly removing their HRH's at some point in the future, so I think the York title will pass from Andrew to whoever is 2nd in line to the throne when Andrew dies.

It won't be that simple.

If Andrew lives for another 40 years it is possible that even William's second child will have married and have their own title by then.

It may very well be that it will be William's heir who gets to recreate the York title, if they so wish.

The Queen, though may decide to change the LPs (or Charles or William could) to allow the York title to pass to Beatrice.

[wbenson]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

The Queen, though may decide to change the LPs (or Charles or William could) to allow the York title to pass to Beatrice.

She doesn't possess the power to change the LPs. She could, as branchg mentions above, regrant the title with a special remainder so that one Dukedom of York would go extinct and one would go to Beatrice, but she can't alter the current title.

[lac2003]

Has any Duke of York title passed to a daughter of a duke? I think there's more of a chance of Anne becoming Queen that Beatrice becoming Duchess of York!!

[Ella Kay]

No, it has never passed to a daughter.

[Marsel]

The Duke of York title has had 8 creations: in 6 cases, the title eventually merged with the Crown (when the holders succeeded to the Throne), in 1 case, the holder died without issues (Prince Richard - one of the Princes in the Tower), and the current holder, Prince Andrew, doesn't have a male Heir.
The title never passed in female line.

Under current law, the 8th creation will indeed become extinct on Andrew’s death (unless he acquires legitimate male heirs before that). Since the title has always been closely associated with the second son of the Sovereign, it is more than likely that Prince Harry will eventually be created The Duke of York (or, if Andrew lives to a very old age and William is King by the time, William's second son could be created The Duke of York).

In theory, the title can be created for Princess Beatrice, especially if the proposed changes in the Succession laws are made (equal primogeniture); however, in order to make the title hereditary (so that Beatrice's children could inherit it), an act of the Parliament would be required because of the current male-only succession rules to the peerage.


I agree it is highly unlikely the title will be re-created for Beatrice: the most probable scenario is that the title would be re-created for the 9th time for Prince Harry.


The Dukedom of York is historically a very important title: it is one of the 6 original titles/dukedoms created in the early 14th century (the others are Dukedoms of Cornwall, Lancaster, Gloucester and Clarence). Currently, only the Dukedom of Clarence is vacant / extant (the Queen is Duke of Lancaster, Prince Charles is Duke of Cornwall, Prince Richard is Duke of Gloucester and Prince Andrew is Duke of York). Whatever the title's future is, it is hardly going to become extant and there'll always be a Duke of York around.

[Zonk]

I concur with the consensus that the York Dukedom will eventually fold back into the Crown.

Princess Beatrice (for reasons given by Skydragon) will not get the title. If and when she marries, I wager (unless its foreign royalty or the British artistocracy) she will be Princess Beatrice, Mrs. Jones (like her aunt before her).

The York Dukedom will most likely (IMO) not revert to Prince Harry if and when Charles becomes King. Since for most of us (not that we will live forever) associate it with Andrew. Again, just my opinon.....no special reason or anything like that.

Harry will get Sussex or something along those lines. And William will use it York for his son. And Clarence has a negative vibes too me. The last Duke of Clarence was Prince Albert Victor.

[Marsel]

I have to disagree with you, Zonk.

Any title is closely associated with its current bearer. I, for one, simply cannot imagine ever calling William the Prince of Wales, even though he will clearly be created one during his father’s Reign: the title is so closely associated with Prince Charles, it is hard to think of anyone but him as Prince of Wales.
Same goes for the “Princess Royal”: can you imagine anyone but Princess Anne having the title?

Nevertheless, Dukedom of York is such an important title that it is highly unlikely to remain extant for any significant period of time. And unless Prince Andrew lives to a very long age, the title is almost certain to be recreated for Prince Harry.

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Marsel

The Duke of York title has had 8 creations: in 6 cases, the title eventually merged with the Crown (when the holders succeeded to the Throne), in 1 case, the holder died without issues (Prince Richard - one of the Princes in the Tower), and the current holder, Prince Andrew, doesn't have a male Heir.
The title never passed in female line.



I agree it is highly unlikely the title will be re-created for Beatrice: the most probable scenario is that the title would be re-created for the 9th time for Prince Harry.


The Dukedom of York is historically a very important title: it is one of the 6 original titles/dukedoms created in the early 14th century (the others are Dukedoms of Cornwall, Lancaster, Gloucester and Clarence). Currently, only the Dukedom of Clarence is vacant / extant (the Queen is Duke of Lancaster, Prince Charles is Duke of Cornwall, Prince Richard is Duke of Gloucester and Prince Andrew is Duke of York). Whatever the title's future is, it is hardly going to become extant and there'll always be a Duke of York around.

At least one other Duke of York died without legitimate issue - Frederick Duke of York the second son of George III in 1827.

From the death of Frederick in 1827 until 1892, when George V was created Duke of York, there was on Duke of York - over 60 years. In fact there have been quite lengthy times without a Duke of York - with the longest between Henry VIII's accession until James I and VI created his own second son Duke of York - 96 years.

It seems that there is often a gap if someone has been associated with the title for some time (George V only used Duke of York for 9 years as he became Duke of Cornwall in early 1901 and then Prince of Wales) so there was a period of over 20 years where the title was not being the primary one used or being used at all before George V used it for his own second son.

I don't think Harry will get York at all.

Andrew is in good health and isn't likely to die in the next 5 to 10 years in which time Harry will probably get his own Dukedom.

It also wouldn't really be possible to create Harry Duke of York (assuming Andrew is dead) before both Beatrice and Eugenie have married as they will still use the 'of York' until they are married.

For anyone interested in the various holders of the Duke of York title Duke of York - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Since Richard, Duke of York, disappeared from the Tower the title has either merged with the Crown or the holder has died without legitimate male issue. Andrew is actually the only holder since that time who looks like dying with legitimate issue and not inheriting the crown - the others who had children became King.