Royal Dukes, Royal Duchies and Royal Ducal Titles 1: Ending 2022

[camelot23ca]

I can understand that desire (if it is one) for Louis. It would be lovely- under different circumstances.

But it wasn’t Philip’s wish. He clearly wanted his title to go to Edward. I think, generally, he wanted one of his sons to get to USE his title. It was something he could pass down to one of his kids for their personal use. (I felt Edward hinted at that line of thinking when he pointed out that Andrew, technically, should have gotten it, but Philip missed the opportunity.)

I think that Charles is smart enough to distinguish between what his personal preference as a grandfather would be (if the part about Louis is true) and what makes sense for the monarchy. Louis will be in the same position as Edward - the younger son of the monarch; if the issue is the title leaving the main line it makes no more sense to give it to him than to give it to Edward. And Louis will have no sense of personal connection to the dukedom the way Edward presumably would. If the issue is Charles wants to hoard titles for his own descendants - which I don’t believe - well, again, this is why making plans for 20 or 30 years down the road always involves risk. Edward should have become the Duke of Cambridge or Sussex or similar when he married, with Philip accepting the fact that the future Duke of Edinburgh would be one of his grandsons or great grandsons instead.

 

[Mbruno]

Well people talk about how Charles wants a slimmed down monarch and is being cautious of titles. If he doesn't even want his grandkids to have titles then why is anyone surprised he might not want the DoE title to be passed on generation after generations via Edward's line? Nothing seemed to be written in stone and provided Charles an out.

This was clearly leaked for a reason. Seems like they testing the reaction. I mean one can really argue you can't be for a slimmed down monarchy and then being upset when Charles starts actually doing it. It it is just unfortunate timing for Edward and I am sure it is slightly embarrassing, especially as he was recently talking about it.

But who knows what the future holds.

Prince Edward already has three titles (Earl of Wessex, Earl of Forfar, and Viscount Severn) that will be passed on generation after generation via Edward's male line until that line is extinguished. There is nothing Charles can do to stop that (only Parliament can rescind peerages).



The Dukedom of Edinburgh, if recreated for Edward in the future, will fall under the same class and, starting with James (if he doesn't take on the HRH) or with James' eldest son, it will no longer be a royal title. So that has nothing to do with "slimming down the Royal Family".

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Charles, though, over the years and explicitly refused to answer any questions about being King or his plans for his reign. The most he's said, I believe, is asking the questioner if he realized that in order to be King, his mother would have to die. He's not about to release anything through Clarence House about his future reign. Even being asked if Camilla would be Queen, the answer given is "we'll have to see won't we?"

HMQ is still alive and it is inappropriate to have such conversations right now. So I don't blame Charles whatsoever for not touching the topics now.

I agree on that. Charles is right about all of it being inappropriate subject matter right now. DofE, future HRHs, etc.

The Prince of Wales has released statements on the subject of titles during his future reign at least twice. In 1999, he was part of the stated agreement regarding the planned conferral of the dukedom of Edinburgh in his reign. In 2005, his office issued an announcement of his intention that his wife would be Princess Consort during his reign.

In my opinion, the answer issued by his spokesperson a few days ago that "no final decisions have been taken" regarding the dukedom also qualifies as an explicit statement, as it backtracks on the "finality" of the agreement announced in 1999.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The Prince of Wales has released statements on the subject of titles during his future reign at least twice. In 1999, he was part of the stated agreement regarding the planned conferral of the dukedom of Edinburgh in his reign. In 2005, his office issued an announcement of his intention that his wife would be Princess Consort during his reign.

In my opinion, the answer issued by his spokesperson a few days ago that "no final decisions have been taken" regarding the dukedom also qualifies as an explicit statement, as it backtracks on the "finality" of the agreement announced in 1999.

It is logical because a Sovereign organizes his/her House to own will and pleasure. That future Sovereign is Charles but of course can also be William, no one knows.

I see all this just as respecting the royal prerogative of the Sovereign to have own considerations, no matter the person whom fullfillls the kingship.

 

[Osipi]

If I can take anything from Edward's statement, it would be that Edward respects and is level headed about how things work. If it should be that for any reason that Charles decides that the title of Duke of Edinburgh will not be created for Edward, he'll accept that decision with grace and dignity and not grab his toys and start throwing them and then go home.

Sometimes I think Edward is the jewel in the crown that is noticed the least but constantly sparkling and is firmly set in that crown. Like Anne, no fanfare or whistles and bells but does the job expertly and is what a royal is expected to be.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Once Charles is King Charles III, how soon will The Dukedom of Edinburgh be recreated for Prince Edward?

 

[Iluvbertie]

Once Charles is King Charles III, how soon will The Dukedom of Edinburgh be recreated for Prince Edward?

If the reports in the media this week are accurate, never.

If Charles III (or whatever regnal name he chooses) decides to honour the announcement made in 1999, any time he likes. There is no set time although I would be surprised if it was before The Queen's funeral but would expect that, and William to be created Prince of Wales, if that is going to happen, before Charles' coronation.

 

[Mbruno]

If I can take anything from Edward's statement, it would be that Edward respects and is level headed about how things work.

Edward has no other option, but to say what he said. Charles will be the King and the King is sovereign in matters such as granting peerages to members of his family. Edward cannot be seen as questioning the royal prerogative. That doesn't mean of course that he is not or will not be disappointed if Charles does not honor the agreement.


I am convinced Edward and Sophie took the agreement for granted. After all, it was Prince Philip's will and the Queen's will, and, whereas future sovereigns are not bound by the will of their predecessors, there is no objective reason for Charles to break the agreement when he is king.



As other posters said, if the title goes to Louis and Louis has male descendants who outlive him, it will leave the main line exactly as it would happen if Edward got the dukedom; the only difference is that it would happen two generations later. Maybe that is Charles' rationale, but I don't see why Louis would have to be made Duke of Edinburgh specifically when there are other dukedoms available to him and Edward has a much stronger connection to the title (being Prince Philip's son) than Louis.



Besides, based on his age, it is possible that Louis won't be made a duke in Charles' reign, but rather when William is already king. And, in that case, it would be more natural for Louis to be made Duke of Cambridge (if York is not available yet).

 

[Mirabel]

As other posters said, if the title goes to Louis and Louis has male descendants who outlive him, it will leave the main line exactly as it would happen if Edward got the dukedom; the only difference is that it would happen two generations later. Maybe that is Charles' rationale, but I don't see why Louis would have to be made Duke of Edinburgh specifically when there are other dukedoms available to him and Edward has a much stronger connection to the title (being Prince Philip's son) than Louis.

If Louis receives the dukedom, there will be one less royal duke.
If Edward receives it, there will be one more.

Isn't Charles supposedly acting on the premise that less is more?

In any event, once he is King, Charles will do as he pleases.

 

[Mbruno]

If Louis receives the dukedom, there will be one less royal duke.
If Edward receives it, there will be one more.

Whether Edward is a royal duke or only a royal earl, he will still be a royal prince (until he dies), just like Louis. So the total number of HRHs, which is the metric Charles is supposed to be eager to limit, will not change either way.

Neither James nor any of James' male line descendants will be royal dukes when they inherit the title, so giving the title to Edward has no impact on the future number of HRHs. That is my point.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Whether Edward is a royal duke or only a royal earl, he will still be a royal prince (until he dies), just like Louis. So the total number of HRHs, which is the metric Charles is supposed to be eager to limit, will not change either way.

Neither James nor any of James' male line descendants will be royal dukes when they inherit the title, so giving the title to Edward has no impact on the future number of HRHs. That is my point.

By my understanding James will be a royal Duke, as grandson to a Sovereign. Like Richard of Gloucester and Edward of Kent: also grandsons of a Sovereign. James is a Prince of the United Kingdom but is not addressed as such, now that is.

 

[Mbruno]

By my understanding James will be a royal Duke, as grandson to a Sovereign. Like Richard of Gloucester and Edward of Kent: also grandsons of a Sovereign. James is a Prince of the United Kingdom but is not addressed as such, now that is.

You are right, but, unless James decides to start using his title of Prince with the style of Royal Highness when he comes of age, he would probably be known as His Grace The Duke of Edinburgh when he inherited the title. So, in practice, I would not count him as a royal duke.


In any case, the reasoning is the same: if James decides to use the HRH and Edward doesn't get the dukedom, he will still be HRH Prince James of Wessex and, later, HRH The Earl of Wessex. Edward being the Duke of Edinburgh or not again has no impact on the expected number of future HRHs, which is not tied to specific peerages, but rather to a particular degree of kinship to a sovereign in male line.

 

[Tirilschatz]

If this is true and Charles wants to keep* the DoE title, and not give it to Edward, than I will be very very very disappointed of him. And do not believe any of his shown grief anymore.

*or whatever procedure it will be


This may sound a bit harsh, but when I first heard of that I was totally taken aback.

 

[Osipi]

If this is true and Charles wants to keep* the DoE title, and not give it to Edward, than I will be very very very disappointed of him. And do not believe any of his shown grief anymore.

*or whatever procedure it will be


This may sound a bit harsh, but when I first heard of that I was totally taken aback.

The thing is that Charles can't *keep* the title as it reverts to the Crown when Charles ascends the throne as King. The title becomes available to be recreated for someone else. Whatever decision Charles makes, I have to believe there will be very good reasons for it if it is not recreated for Edward according to his parent's wishes.

I truly believe that any decisions that Charles makes when he ascends the throne will be totally and completely for the good of the monarchy and not any other reasons. Charles, to me, is and always has been one that looks to make things better for everyone and is not a self serving individual at all. In terms of ego, I don't think I've ever seen any example from him that would deem him to be egotistical at all.

I still believe that Charles will honor his parent's wishes when the time comes.

 

[sophie25]

The thing is that Charles can't *keep* the title as it reverts to the Crown when Charles ascends the throne as King. The title becomes available to be recreated for someone else. Whatever decision Charles makes, I have to believe there will be very good reasons for it if it is not recreated for Edward according to his parent's wishes.

I truly believe that any decisions that Charles makes when he ascends the throne will be totally and completely for the good of the monarchy and not any other reasons. Charles, to me, is and always has been one that looks to make things better for everyone and is not a self serving individual at all. In terms of ego, I don't think I've ever seen any example from him that would deem him to be egotistical at all.

I still believe that Charles will honor his parent's wishes when the time comes.

I'm sorry, but if Charles does not honour this then I think it will be nothing short of disgraceful. It was his late father's dearest wish that his son, Prince Edward, received his title of Duke of Edinburgh. No if's, no but's nothing.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

If this is true and Charles wants to keep* the DoE title, and not give it to Edward, than I will be very very very disappointed of him. And do not believe any of his shown grief anymore.

*or whatever procedure it will be


This may sound a bit harsh, but when I first heard of that I was totally taken aback.

Charles has zero comma zero power on "keeping" his father's three peerages as these are hereditary for all patrilineal male descendants of Prince Philip (with Edward actually being the Nr 8 in the line of succession to said peerages).

Only when these peerages cease to exist (for an example because the current 2nd Duke of Edinburgh becomes King) it is open for new creations by the King.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

If this is true and Charles wants to keep* the DoE title, and not give it to Edward, than I will be very very very disappointed of him. And do not believe any of his shown grief anymore.

*or whatever procedure it will be


This may sound a bit harsh, but when I first heard of that I was totally taken aback.

The thing is that Charles can't *keep* the title as it reverts to the Crown when Charles ascends the throne as King. The title becomes available to be recreated for someone else.

Charles has zero comma zero power on "keeping" his father's three peerages as these are hereditary for all patrilineal male descendants of Prince Philip (with Edward actually being the Nr 8 in the line of succession to said peerages).

Only when these peerages cease to exist (for an example because the current 2nd Duke of Edinburgh becomes King) it is open for new creations by the King.

Note that Tirilschatz wrote "keep* [...] *or whatever procedure it will be". It seems clear what they meant (namely, that it will be at King Charles's discretion whether to confer the dukedom as agreed in 1999 or not to confer it), even if they are understandably not fluent in British legal jargon, just as many posters are not fluent in the technical terminology used within other monarchies and aristocracies and resort to using the British terminology.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It remains a weird arrangement that the current Number 8 in line for the Dukedom should get it, bypassing 7 other successors. Of course, back in 1999 no one could have foreseen that even in 2021 Edward has to "wait".

In hindsight it was easier to go the normal route back in 1999. Edward could have been a Royal Duke for 22 years now! The waiting game was totally unneccessary.

Edward could have been HRH The Duke of Clarence or whatever for 22 years and in the future still become HRH The Duke of Clarence, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Wessex, Earl of Forfar, Viscount Severn, amassing quite a lot of peerages for a junior son.

 

[Claire]

Actually this appears to be the moving of titles from all except the direct line now _ I expect that Charles wants James to be known only as James Mountbatten Windsor, same for Louise and would like both York Princess to be known only by their married names going forward so Eugenie Brookbanks etc.
It is to standardize the monarchy going forward all royals except direct heir will have no titles at all, keeping in line with how the Princess Royal created her children and the styling of Prince Harry’s children.
So no titles for Charlotte and Louis’s children either.

I really thing this is brother some in that you will have peers with titles and nephews of the king without. Also there are a number of people that are going to say that Charles has done this simply to cover Harry’s wants and suddenly make them policy.

 

[Osipi]

Actually this appears to be the moving of titles from all except the direct line now _ I expect that Charles wants James to be known only as James Mountbatten Windsor, same for Louise and would like both York Princess to be known only by their married names going forward so Eugenie Brookbanks etc.
It is to standardize the monarchy going forward all royals except direct heir will have no titles at all, keeping in line with how the Princess Royal created her children and the styling of Prince Harry’s children.
So no titles for Charlotte and Louis’s children either.

I really thing this is brother some in that you will have peers with titles and nephews of the king without. Also there are a number of people that are going to say that Charles has done this simply to cover Harry’s wants and suddenly make them policy.

As much as I can believe that Charles could and may restrict the HRH Prince/ss to the main line of succession, I really don't feel that he would go as far as to eliminate peerage titles from the House of Windsor.

The example of the Princess Royal "creating" her children with no titles isn't totally correct. They did refuse a title for Mark Phillips which would have enabled Peter to inherit on the death of his father. It's very similar to what happened with Princess Margaret whose husband was created a peer and he passed that onto his oldest son. Titles and styles, at this time, just are not able to be passed down through the female line.

We also have to remember that those in the House of Windsor that do not hold a peerage title are already considered commoners. Prince Michael of Kent is a good example of this. The UK's parliamentary government does still have a branch called the House of Lords. What is very possible though is that Charles may follow Parliament's example and only create lifetime peerages. The last three hereditary peerages (excluding royal peerages) were created in 1984, when Harold Macmillan was created Earl of Stockton, and William Whitelaw and George Thomas were created Viscounts. Of these three, only Macmillan had an heir.

I sincerely believe that whatever Charles does decide to do, it will in no way, shape or form be related in any way to his situation with Harry. Charles will act with the monarchy in mind. Not individuals. ?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The example of the Princess Royal "creating" her children with no titles isn't totally correct. They did refuse a title for Mark Phillips which would have enabled Peter to inherit on the death of his father. It's very similar to what happened with Princess Margaret whose husband was created a peer and he passed that onto his oldest son. Titles and styles, at this time, just are not able to be passed down through the female line.

The Sovereign is the fount of honors. Queen Elizabeth was at liberty to create a hereditary peerage for her daughter (or a life peerage, which would at minimum have bestowed the courtesy title of The Honourable on her children) or to allow her daughter to pass on her royal title, unless of course the Government advised against it, since the Sovereign is by convention obligated to follow the advice of the Government. She made the decision not to.

This press report from 1977 does not mention whether it was Anne or Mark who was offered the peerage, so I am not sure that information was ever leaked. I do believe that it was Mark who was offered the peerage, given the precedent set with Antony Armstrong-Jones.

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/11/16/...irth-to-boy-fifth-in-line-to-the-british.html

I agree that elimininating courtesy titles from children of royal peers while they continue to be used by the children of non-royal peers would be a step too far.

 

[Mbruno]

Actually this appears to be the moving of titles from all except the direct line now _ I expect that Charles wants James to be known only as James Mountbatten Windsor, same for Louise and would like both York Princess to be known only by their married names going forward so Eugenie Brookbanks etc.
It is to standardize the monarchy going forward all royals except direct heir will have no titles at all, keeping in line with how the Princess Royal created her children and the styling of Prince Harry’s children.
So no titles for Charlotte and Louis’s children either.

I really thing this is brother some in that you will have peers with titles and nephews of the king without. Also there are a number of people that are going to say that Charles has done this simply to cover Harry’s wants and suddenly make them policy.

In that case, Louis should have no dukedom either and be known simply as HRH Prince Louis of Wales when Charles is king and William is PoW, and later as HRH The Prince Louis when William is king.

I can't predict the future, but I find that unlikely. I believe either Charles or William (whoever is the King at the time) will make Louis a royal duke when he gets married.

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

In that case, Louis should have no dukedom either and be known simply as HRH Prince Louis of Wales when Charles is king and William is PoW, and later as HRH The Prince Louis when William is king.

I can't predict the future, but I find that unlikely. I believe either Charles or William (whoever is the King at the time) will make Louis a royal duke when he gets married.

In the fun of speculating many years (and even decades) ahead, I predict that this will be tied to Louis' place as a working member of the family. If Louis is intended to work as a full-time royal, he will be given a Dukedom; if not, he will not.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Is it possible for Prince Louis to be made a royal duke before he gets married?

 

[muriel]

Is it possible for Prince Louis to be made a royal duke before he gets married?

The monarch is the fount of all honour, and so, nothing stops the monarch of the day from making Louis a royal duke at any time. That said, tradition would suggest that Louis is unlikely to be created a Duke till his wedding.

 

[Stefan]

The monarch is the fount of all honour, and so, nothing stops the monarch of the day from making Louis a royal duke at any time. That said, tradition would suggest that Louis is unlikely to be created a Duke till his wedding.

But then this tradition seems only have been started by Queen Elizabeth II. as her father was made a Duke in 1920 several years before his Wedding and also the late duke of Gloucester. From her uncles only the late Duke of Kent had to wait until his Wedding.

 

[muriel]

But then this tradition seems only have been started by Queen Elizabeth II. as her father was made a Duke in 1920 several years before his Wedding and also the late duke of Gloucester. From her uncles only the late Duke of Kent had to wait until his Wedding.

Fair point.

 

[Iluvbertie]

But then this tradition seems only have been started by Queen Elizabeth II. as her father was made a Duke in 1920 several years before his Wedding and also the late duke of Gloucester. From her uncles only the late Duke of Kent had to wait until his Wedding.

He didn't have to wait until his wedding day though.

He was created Duke of Kent on 12th October but didn't marry until 29th November 1934.

 

[Stefan]

He didn't have to wait until his wedding day though.

He was created Duke of Kent on 12th October but didn't marry until 29th November 1934.

Ok. But he had to wait longer then his 2 brothers

 

[Duke_of_Berkshire]

In the fun of speculating many years (and even decades) ahead, I predict that this will be tied to Louis' place as a working member of the family. If Louis is intended to work as a full-time royal, he will be given a Dukedom; if not, he will not.

You nailed it on the head here, the question is going to be what do you want to do. They won't make the same mistake as Harry, granting him a Dukedom and then him going off into the sunset. If you want a title, you work, if you don't want a title, then you are free to do as you please.