As I am very interested in Britain, I have a question nobody has ever been able (or willing) to answer:
WHY are members of the reigning house not conferred on dukedoms that go along with land property? Wouldn't it be self-evident that is people who carry out public and royal duties to possess these rewards for serving the Crown (which dukedoms orinially were)? Is there any official reason for that? Seems very illogical to me. Thank you in advance.
The Queen and the Royal Family have access to numerous official residences and vast amounts of land held by the Crown Estate, as well as their private ownership of several estates throughout Britain.
The Royal Family privately owns Sandringham House (20,000 acres), Balmoral Castle (49,000 acres), Highgrove House (37 acres), Birkhall House (53,000 acres), Llwynywormwood (192 acres), Gatcombe Park (730 acres) and St. Mary's in the Isles of Scilly - the entire island is privately owned except the main settlement at Hugh Town.
Then, of course, they have the use of all the official residences held by the Crown (i.e. Buckingham, Kensington, St. James's, Clarence House, Windsor Castle and the Palace of Holyroodhouse).
It really has never been the case that a non-royal dukedom was created with land attached..
it was the other way around.. titles were generally conferred upon gentlemen who were
already the owners of large estates.
The extant non-royal dukedoms have existed for centuries - Norfolk (1483), Somerset (1547), Grafton (1675), Beaufort (1682) and Bedford (1694) - to name a few.
With the exception of
Grafton, all these titles existed in another form prior to the creation of the ducal title.
For example, the 1st Duke of Beaufort came from a line of
Earls and Marquesses of Worcester, and there were
Earls of Norfolk and
Earls of Bedford before there were
Dukes.. so these families have existed for far longer than the ducal titles they hold today. Naturally, these families acquired vast amounts of property and wealth over the centuries, which has been handed down to the heir of each generation.
More recent non-royal dukedoms like
Fife (1900) and
Westminster (1874), were conferred upon gentlemen who were already prominent members of the nobility with fortunes or connections.
The Duke of Fife came from a long line of earls and he happened to marry into the BRF, thereby becoming a duke. The Duke of Westminster also came from a line of earls and marquesses. He was a noted politician and philanthropist, and was the richest man in Britain when he was elevated.
In modern times, there have been no new creations of ducal titles other than those created for members of the royal family.. and since the royal family already owns or has access to vast estates, it has not been necessary to purchase, grant or bestow property along with the title..
Although individual estates have been purchased by members of the royal family as residences, those are private properties and are not connected to any title they may hold.. the same is true for the private estate of any non-royal duke. If a non-royal duke died without any male heir, the estate would be inherited by his daughter.. but she could not inherit his title unless there was a specific remainder allowing her to do so.
As far as royal duties are concerned, it is the main role of the BRF to carry out public duties and ceremonials for the British public. As a constitutional monarchy, their very existence depends upon the will of the British people.. and if they do not perform their duties, the monarchy could be abolished.
Hope this helps answer your question
Welcome to the Forum
