The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #621  
Old 04-10-2021, 08:49 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 6,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Interestingly, the death announcement from the royal court refers to HRH not as His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh but as His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

https://www.royal.uk/




That is consistent with the Queen's declaration of February 1957 :


Quote:



THE LONDON GAZETTE, 22 FEBRUARY, 19571209

Whitehall, February 22, 1957.
The Q'UEBN has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm bearing date 22nd February, 1957, to give and grant unto His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, K.G., K.T., G.B.E., the style and titular dignity of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and NorthernIreland.



Whitehall, February 22, 1957.
The QUEEN has been pleased to declare her will and pleasure that His 'Royal Highness the Dukeof Edinburgh shall henceforth be known as His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

__________________

Reply With Quote
  #622  
Old 04-10-2021, 08:57 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I checked the Roll of the Peerage today at the site of the College of Arms and Prince Phiiip apparently is still listed as Duke of Edinburgh.


In theory, under the Royal Warrant of 2004, successors to a peerage must petition the Lord Chancellor to be included in the roll presenting proof of succession. I don't think that will be a problem for the PoW thoigh and I suggest we keep monitoring the roll for updates.


https://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/i...he_Peerage.pdf
It will take weeks, if not months, for this to be dealt with. It isn't something that has to be done all that fast. It is the paperwork to confirm what is already quite clear.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #623  
Old 04-10-2021, 09:58 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Queen Elizabeth II has reserved it for her husband and children, but in the past it was used indiscriminately albeit not very consistently for all princes and princesses.
Correction: Having checked the London Gazette, Queen Elizabeth II also sometimes used "The" for her cousin(s) in the early years of her reign.



The official announcement in 1999 in regard to the dukedom of Edinburgh:

https://web.archive.org/web/20140201...ard/40309.html

Title of HRH The Prince Edward

The Queen has today been pleased to confer an Earldom on The Prince Edward. His titles will be Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn. The Prince Edward thus becomes His Royal Highness The Earl of Wessex and Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones on marriage will become Her Royal Highness The Countess of Wessex.

The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales have also agreed that The Prince Edward should be given the Dukedom of Edinburgh in due course, when the present title now held by Prince Philip eventually reverts to the Crown.

The Queen has also decided, with the agreement of The Prince Edward and Miss Rhys-Jones, that any children they might have should not be given the style His or Her Royal Highness, but would have courtesy titles as sons or daughters of an Earl.
Reply With Quote
  #624  
Old 04-10-2021, 10:12 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The College of Arms:


The Titles of HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

The Duke of Edinburgh was granted the style and title of Royal Highness on 19 November 1947; on the next day, 20 November, he was created Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, of Greenwich in the County of London.

These peerages are hereditary and on the death of His Royal Highness have passed to his eldest son, HRH The Prince of Wales. In the event of the Prince of Wales or any subsequent holder of these titles succeeding to the Crown, these titles and all others held will merge with the Crown.

His Royal Highness was made a Prince of the United Kingdom by Letters Patent of the present Queen dated 22 February 1957. A declaration of the same date communicated Her Majesty’s will and pleasure that her husband be known as His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

His Royal Highness’s style and titles will be declared at his funeral by Garter Principal King of Arms, in accordance with custom.

https://www.college-of-arms.gov.uk/n...e-of-edinburgh

Why is it that the men in the British royal family are granted subsidiary peerages even if it is plainly apparent that the subsidiary peerages will never be used? In Philip's case, for example, it was expected that his future eldest son, and the future eldest son of his eldest son, would be royal princes and subsequently kings (I am aware that the Letters Patent were not issued until Elizabeth's pregnancy, but I presume it was always planned), and thus would never use Earl of Merioneth and Lord Greenwich in the fashion of heirs apparent of nonroyal dukes.
Reply With Quote
  #625  
Old 04-10-2021, 09:53 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,095
In Philip's case that is true but with other royal dukedoms those secondary titles are used e.g. The Duke of Gloucester's son uses Earl of Ulster and his grandson Baron/Lord Culloden while The Duke of Kent's son uses Earl of St Andrew's and grandson Baron/Lord Downpatrick.

Archie could be using Earl Dumbarton but his parents have said 'no' at the moment.

I suppose there was some theory whereby Edinburgh might end up with someone other than the future monarch e.g. if William and George die before The Queen and Charles then Charlotte becomes Queen but Louis inherits Edinburgh and Cambridge. As Louis' son wouldn't then be a male-line grandchild of a monarch that son would use Earl of Merioneth (it is senior to William's Earl of Strathearn) ... dealing with theoretical possibilities is something that monarchs deal with.
Reply With Quote
  #626  
Old 04-10-2021, 10:20 PM
Prinsara's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 1,018
Isn't it just tradition and grander the more you add on? If there were no subsidiary titles when other people have them it would look like a slight.
Reply With Quote
  #627  
Old 04-10-2021, 10:21 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Why is it that the men in the British royal family are granted subsidiary peerages even if it is plainly apparent that the subsidiary peerages will never be used? [...]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
In Philip's case that is true but with other royal dukedoms those secondary titles are used [...]
There have been cases other than Philip's: the current Duke of Cambridge for one (he was granted an earldom and barony together with his dukedom in 2011), King George V for another (as the eldest surviving son of the Prince of Wales, he was granted the Dukedom of York together with an earldom and barony in 1892). Their senior heirs male would likewise have been expected to remain princes/kings throughout their lives, with no need to use the secondary peerages.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I suppose there was some theory whereby Edinburgh might end up with someone other than the future monarch e.g. if William and George die before The Queen and Charles then Charlotte becomes Queen but Louis inherits Edinburgh and Cambridge. As Louis' son wouldn't then be a male-line grandchild of a monarch that son would use Earl of Merioneth (it is senior to William's Earl of Strathearn) ... dealing with theoretical possibilities is something that monarchs deal with.
That particular situation wouldn't have been possible at the time the dukedom of Edinburgh was granted since sons took priority over daughters in the succession to the crown, but a similar situation could have occurred had Charles predeceased Philip leaving a daughter. In that scenario, Charles's daughter would have become Queen while Andrew would have become Duke of Edinburgh.

Still, such situations are much less likely than other situations which British monarchs have chosen not to deal with in advance.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Prinsara View Post
Isn't it just tradition and grander the more you add on? If there were no subsidiary titles when other people have them it would look like a slight.
Yes, that might be. In the same vein, I wonder if for example some residents of England would have objected to Philip having no references to England in his peerages.
Reply With Quote
  #628  
Old 04-10-2021, 11:25 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post

That particular situation wouldn't have been possible at the time the dukedom of Edinburgh was granted since sons took priority over daughters in the succession to the crown, but a similar situation could have occurred had Charles predeceased Philip leaving a daughter. In that scenario, Charles's daughter would have become Queen while Andrew would have become Duke of Edinburgh.
That is the exact scenario that I was envisaging - where the heir apparent was female with a younger brother to inherit.

George VI was aware enough of history to know that not everything goes directly as planned so the idea that a grandson could have a daughter as their only child and then die allowing for a younger brother to inherit Philip's titles was one he possibly realised was possible.

George VI knew, for instance, that Queen Victoria's father left only one daughter. Of course the Kent title couldn't pass to anyone at that point but move it on a generation and that then does become possible.
Reply With Quote
  #629  
Old 04-14-2021, 09:03 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 6,786
Queen Victoria's son Prince Alfred became The Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha on August 23, 1893. Did he have to sign legal paper work that he would no longer be The Duke of Edinburgh?
Reply With Quote
  #630  
Old 04-14-2021, 11:36 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,095
No.

He was still the Duke of Edinburgh.

Until 1963 it wasn't possible for a British peer to even disclaim a peerage. After 1963 a person could disclaim an inherited title which meant they wouldn't take up the peerage title but would still in reality hold it and their heir would still inherit it. That had to be done within one year of inheriting the title. It has never been possible, in the UK, for a peer to simply renounce their peerage.

Only an Act of Parliament can remove a British peerage title and none was passed to strip Alfred of his British titles.

It was not unusual for a foreigner to hold both a British title AND a foreign one e.g. The Dukes of Cumberland who were also Kings of Hanover from 1837 to 1866 (when the kingdom of Hanover was annexed by Prussia).

Another example is Alfred's successor as Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha who also held the title Duke of Albany inherited from his father Prince Leopold.

It is interesting to think that if Alfred's son had lived to 1917, and had a male heir, in all likelihood Edinburgh would have been a title not available as in 1917 the Titles Deprivation Act deprived the titles of Duke of Cumberland and Duke of Albany from their then holders but left their descendants with the rights to petition the British parliament to have the titles restored. Had Alfred had a son alive in 1917 no doubt it would have been the Edinburgh title so deprived rather than Albany and the title Albany would now be a peerage that had lost its royal association as Gloucester and Kent will do in the next generation.
__________________

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 25 08-22-2018 09:23 AM
Moroccan Royal Names and Titles bjanka66 Royal Family of Morocco 62 07-25-2018 04:50 PM
Royal, Princely and Comital Titles MAfan Royal Families of Italy 31 08-08-2016 10:55 PM




Popular Tags
abu dhabi american american history ancestry archie mountbatten-windsor baby names baptism british british royal family british royals brownbitcoinqueen carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house cpr customs dresses duke of sussex earl of snowdon family tree general news thread george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs imperial household jack brooksbank jacobite japan jewellery jewelry kensington palace king edward vii line of succession list of rulers luxembourg maxima meghan markle monarchy nepal nepalese royal family nepalese royal jewels pless prince constantijn princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn walailak princess laurentien princess of orange princess ribha queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal jewels royalty of taiwan russian court dress serbian royal family spain sussex swedish queen thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:53 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×