Possible Dukedom for Harry and Meghan

[Mirabel]

I read somewhere that Harry favors the Sussex title, so I think that is pretty much a done deal.

 

[Pranter]

Yeah but we have no way to know if that's even true....the media gets it wrong often enough.


LaRae

 

[Denville]

I read somewhere that Harry favors the Sussex title, so I think that is pretty much a done deal.

Since it is up to his grandmother I don't think that that matters. Not that I have any idea which title he might prefer, since I doubt if he is likely to say anything about it.

Now that's an interesting angle to think about. Let's think this through to it's possible conclusion. Below are some facts and questions:

• The Prince of Wales currently lives in Clarence House.
• When The Prince of Wales ascends the throne, will he move into Buckingham Palace?
• Prince Harry and Meghan will presumably need to move into a home more fitting of their status.
• Could they be created the Duke and Duchess of Clarence and move into Clarence House?

Hmmm?

of course they COULD be Duke and Dss of Clarence. however I doubt if they will get Clarence house... They'll problably stay in Nott Cottage until they have children and then they'll get a bigger apartment. Charles may remain in C House, and if he doesn't, it will problaby go to William...

 

[JR76]

of course they COULD be Duke and Dss of Clarence. however I doubt if they will get Clarence house... They'll problably stay in Nott Cottage until they have children and then they'll get a bigger apartment. Charles may remain in C House, and if he doesn't, it will problaby go to William...

With the exception of Harry moving to a bigger place eventually I've been thinking the rest will stay put after Charles ascends the throne and BP will become the office. I can't imagine the Cambridges wanting to live there.

 

[ada]

Now that's an interesting angle to think about. Let's think this through to it's possible conclusion. Below are some facts and questions:

• The Prince of Wales currently lives in Clarence House.
• When The Prince of Wales ascends the throne, will he move into Buckingham Palace?
• Prince Harry and Meghan will presumably need to move into a home more fitting of their status.
• Could they be created the Duke and Duchess of Clarence and move into Clarence House?

Hmmm?

Yes, Like that train of thought

 

[Fem]

of course they COULD be Duke and Dss of Clarence. however I doubt if they will get Clarence house... They'll problably stay in Nott Cottage until they have children and then they'll get a bigger apartment. Charles may remain in C House, and if he doesn't, it will problaby go to William...

You do realize that William and Catherine have a beautiful, grand, huge place they spend millions renovating and furnishing not so long ago, right? ? I don't think they'll want to move out of their KP apartment before they have to.

 

[Denville]

As I said, If Charles becomes King and wants to move out, it will probably go to William. I don't know what you mean

 

[Spheno]

As I said, If Charles becomes King and wants to move out, it will probably go to William. I don't know what you mean

Facts:
It's officially confirmed that Charles will move in Buckingham palace after his accession.
It's officially confirmed that William will stay at Kensington palace untill his own accession.
It's officially announced that Harry and Meghan will live at Nottingham Cottage.

Observation:
Nottingham Cottage is small for any family. Obviously, it is too small for royal prince's family.
During Charle's reign Clarence House will be free.

Conclusion:
At the moment Clarence House is one of strongest contender for Harry's future home. That's why they don't rush to anounce information about Harry's future home. It all depends on how long the queen is alive.

Please, admins, move this discussion in Harry's future home thread

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Why would Clarence House go to William? The Queen Mother lived there before Charles, it's not designated the heir's home.
Lots of money was spent renovating homes for the Cambridges-why would they move?

 

[Jacknch]

Let's move on back to the topic - we have other threads to discuss what will happen when Charles becomes king and a home for Harry & Meghan.

 

[Curbside]

I don't know if this has already been discussed, but are royal dukedoms passed along to the couple's children? What titles do the children have and do they get upgraded when others higher up in line die? I know the Duke of York's daughters are princesses, but I assume this has to do with the fact that their grandmother is the monarch. But Meghan and Harry's kids would be great-grandchildren.

 

[Ish]

I don't know if this has already been discussed, but are royal dukedoms passed along to the couple's children? What titles do the children have and do they get upgraded when others higher up in line die? I know the Duke of York's daughters are princesses, but I assume this has to do with the fact that their grandmother is the monarch. But Meghan and Harry's kids would be great-grandchildren.

The male line grandchildren of a monarch are Prince/Princess regardless of their parents titles (covered by the 1917 LPs).

Also covered by those LPs, the children of a Prince are Lord/Lady unless they themselves are a Prince/Princess.

Unless a Royal Peerage is made to be nonhereditary (which I don’t believe we’ve ever seen), then the title will be inherited in accordance to whatever rules are set up when the title is created (usually male primogeniture).

Harry’s children will be Lord/Lady regardless of what title he is given - comparable to Prince Michael’s children.

If Harry is given a title, his eldest son will use his secondary title by courtesy - comparable to the sons of the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester.

When Harry dies, his eldest son will inherit his titles - comparable to the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester, who each inherited their titles from their fathers.

Harry’s eldest son’s children will be styled as the children of whatever rank Harry’s secondary title is - comparable to the children of the eldest sons of the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester.

When Harry’s eldest son dies, the title will pass on to his own eldest son, and cease to be a Royal title as Harry’s grandchildren will be too far removed from the monarch to be royals themselves.

This of course is assuming “best” case scenario - it’s a bit different if Harry doesn’t have sons (like Andrew), or if his eldest son predeceases him (like the late Duke of Gloucester), or if his eldest son doesn’t have sons, or if Harry only wants an Earldom and wants his children to be styled as the children of an Earl (like Edward).

Also, unless Harry doesn’t want them styled as Prince/Princess or the current LPs are changed, his children will be born Lord/Lady, but become Prince/Princess when Charles is King.

 

[sndral]

Sorry to be redundant, I was typing my abbreviated answer while Ish was posting their far more eloquent reply.

I don't know if this has already been discussed, but are royal dukedoms passed along to the couple's children? What titles do the children have and do they get upgraded when others higher up in line die? I know the Duke of York's daughters are princesses, but I assume this has to do with the fact that their grandmother is the monarch. But Meghan and Harry's kids would be great-grandchildren.

While the Queen is alive Harry’s children would be styled as the children of a Duke (whether he receives a Dukedom or not) unless the Queen decides otherwise - as she did for William’s children prior to Prince George’s birth. Once Charles becomes King Harry’s children, as male line grandchildren of the monarch, would become Prince/Princess (like the Yorks) unless the King decides otherwise (like Queen Elizabeth II did with the Wessex’s.)
I think there’s a thread devoted to the title/styles of Prince Harry’s future spouse & children where the experts have weighed in on the possibilities over the years

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Most likely it will be Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and no move by them to Clarence House. H&M will most likely eventually be given larger space in KP near William & Kate (as renovations are underway at the Orangery to make office space there, and to take back some current offices at KP to turn back into apartments).

I'm not sure I get the uber love for 'Clarence'. I had an uncle named Clarence. There's a nice ring to the name, sure. It's old-fashioned as a given name and timeless as a place name and a title I suppose.

However, let's not forget that the dubious most recent Duke of Clarence was Princess Elizabeth's (now Queen Elizabeth's) great uncle, even though he died before she was born. Elizabeth did get to know very well as a child, the Duke of Clarence's fiancee, who later married his brother George (King George V & Queen Mary -- QE's grandparents). As a result, I think the sad associations connected to the Clarence dukedom are therefore still too recent in royal family memory. Sorry to burst the romance with 'Clarence' moniker bubble. ?

'Sussex' is winning in this poll I suppose because it seems a foregone conclusion that Harry prefers the title and there aren't many available. We'll find out what the Queen decides. OTOH, will Harry decide not to accept a dukedom? He probably will accept whatever the Queen assigns.

Those who are trying to shy away from 'Sussex' I wonder if they have worries about H&M's success and their sexiness. 'Sussex' seems apropos in more ways than one. Although, I can understand the reluctance to get on board.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I don't know if this has already been discussed, but are royal dukedoms passed along to the couple's children? What titles do the children have and do they get upgraded when others higher up in line die? I know the Duke of York's daughters are princesses, but I assume this has to do with the fact that their grandmother is the monarch. But Meghan and Harry's kids would be great-grandchildren.

1 a) Under the existing 1917 Letters Patent Harry's children will be born as Lord/Lady xxx Mountbatten-Windsor but ...

1 b) The Queen could issue new LPs (as she did in 2012 for all of William's children and not just George) to give Harry's children HRH status from birth.

2. If 1 a) is followed they will become HRH Prince/Princess of xxxx when Charles becomes King

3. Based on William's LPs for the Cambridge title only male line descendants could inherit Harry's title - 'heir male of the body' was specified in William's LPs just as it was in Edward's, Andrew's, Snowdon's and Philip's before that (and the Kent's and Gloucester's)

4. If 1 a) is followed the eldest son would use Harry's second title as a courtesy title just as James uses Viscount Severn now as the heir to Edward's Earl of Wessex.

5 If 1 b) is followed there will be no use of the secondary title in amongst Harry's children. Go back to the current Dukes of Gloucester and Kent who when heirs apparent to their fathers' titles didn't use their fathers' secondary titles but were known as HRH Prince Richard of Gloucester and HRH Prince Edward of Kent. Their sons use Earl of Ulster and Earl of St Andrews as they are the heirs apparent while the grandsons use Baron Culloden and Baron Downpatrick respectively (when their grandfathers pass they will move up to their father's current courtesy titles.

5. All girls will be either Princess or Ladies as the precedence for the LPs is for only the sons to be in the line to inherit.

IF by any chance the Queen did issue LPs to allow for female inheritance I suspect she would be pressured, especially by Andrew, to re-issue the LPs for the York and Wessex titles in particular to allow the same thing.

In summary assuming no new LPs issued:

while the Queen is alive - Lord/Lady with the eldest son using Harry's second title

when Charles becomes King upgraded to HRH Prince/Princess


The added wrinkle is that Edward's children aren't HRH Prince/Princess and with the reports of a smaller royal family and the Cambridges going to have at least three there is a very real possibility that Harry may follow his Uncle Edward's lead and ask that his children are never HRH's forecasting a time when the LPs will be issued to restrict HRH to the absolute direct line only rather than to the collateral lines such as the Gloucester's and Kent's and even the York's and Wessex's. No doubt someone will argue that 'oh William only has one brother while Charles has three siblings ... but the Queen only had one sister and her children aren't royal).

 

[burbankstorylady]

I think it's pretty certain that he will be the Duke of Sussex but I still chose that it would be a new dukedom (I want a Duke of Athlone) even though I do not believe that is at all likely.... not even a little bit. It's just a private fantasy, I guess. I just like the idea of a new dukedom, and the thing is about Athlone, it's connected to Albert Victor as well as to the Tecks. And it also links to William's title, as Cambridge was last used for the Marquessate in the Teck family.



I know it will be Duke of Sussex. The Debrett's guy is confident about it. He is really the one to know such things. The Telegraph has come out saying it *certainly will* be. So yeah. I think in the royal family it's decided to be Sussex.

 

[Countessmeout]

Athlone, like Connaught, is impossible. It is in the republic of Ireland.

When the title was made for Alexander of Teck, The republic hadn't been declared yet (earl in 1917, republic officially declared in 1919)

Even if it was Northern Ireland, the irish title they get is usually their most minor title (baron).

 

[Denville]

Certainly not Athlone..

 

[Ish]

Athlone, like Connaught, is impossible. It is in the republic of Ireland.

When the title was made for Alexander of Teck, The republic hadn't been declared yet (earl in 1917, republic officially declared in 1919)

Even if it was Northern Ireland, the irish title they get is usually their most minor title (baron).

One correction: while the Irish Republic was declared in 1919, Ireland didn’t actually become a Republic until 1949; Ireland didn’t even have independence from the UK until 1922.

Hence why the future George VI was able to be created Baron of Killarney in 1920, despite Killarney being in the south.

That said, as Ireland has been a Republic for almost 70 years now, using a place in the Republic of Ireland would be highly inappropriate.

 

[padams2359]

Being a red head, it might work. He is the most Irish looking since Henry VIII. Coincidence?

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

These titles mean nothing. The Duke of York has nothing with York. He did not even marry in York Cathedral, one of the most beautiful buildings of Britain. The Duke of Cambridge has nothing with Cambridge. He even did not study at the world-famous university there. The dude is also Baron Carrickfergus on the Irish isle. I wonder if the villagers ever have seen any difference before and after "their" current Baron.

It would be nice if there is ANY relationship between the person and the title. Otherwise it is just an ape theatre: throw a nickel and a plastic ball with your new Dukedom rolls out.

There is a difference with dynastic titles: Duke of Lancaster, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Nassau, Prince of Asturias, etc. which are connected to a position in the Royal House. But just -out of the blue- bestow a certain place to someone, without even the slightest existence of a special relationship (Wiliam + Cambridge) or even to babies whom have no idea (the fleet of new Swedish Dukes and Duchesses): it shows it is all just theatre, meaningless and another freebie argument for antimonarchists.

 

[Gaudete]

I haven’t seen a single republican objection to these Ducal titles. They have bigger fish to fry. It’s tradition. It’s precedence. It’s convention. Why is a ducal title any more pointless theatre than a princely title? Or any title come to that?

 

[Furienna]

These titles mean nothing. The Duke of York has nothing with York. He did not even marry in York Cathedral, one of the most beautiful buildings of Britain. The Duke of Cambridge has nothing with Cambridge. He even did not study at the world-famous university there. The dude is also Baron Carrickfergus on the Irish isle. I wonder if the villagers ever have seen any difference before and after "their" current Baron.

It would be nice if there is ANY relationship between the person and the title. Otherwise it is just an ape theatre: throw a nickel and a plastic ball with your new Dukedom rolls out.

There is a difference with dynastic titles: Duke of Lancaster, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Nassau, Prince of Asturias, etc. which are connected to a position in the Royal House. But just -out of the blue- bestow a certain place to someone, without even the slightest existence of a special relationship (Wiliam + Cambridge) or even to babies whom have no idea (the fleet of new Swedish Dukes and Duchesses): it shows it is all just theatre, meaningless and another freebie argument for antimonarchists.

I see what you mean. Yes, a duke or duchess should be a working representative of their dukedom. And that is how things are supposed to work here in Sweden, at least. But like you said, giving a new-born baby a dukedom (which we still do for some weird reason) just proves that it's just a title for show these days. Then again, our princes have been given dukedoms at birth since the 1820s. So that is a rather old tradition now as well...

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

There is a difference with being born a prince of the blood royal. They all are Princes: Prince Andrew, Prince Edward, Prince William, Prince Harry.

But then, litterally as a wedding present (!), they are bestowed a Dukedom. "You get York. And for you I have Edinburgh on hold, but Wessex first. And for you I have a nice surprise: Cambridge, isn't that nice?"

It means nothing and it has no added value for the people in York, Edinburgh, Wessex and Cambridge. Or did I miss something?

It is a freebie to republicans in the sense that -as nothing else- it litterally shows the emptiness and the hollowness of the aspects of the monarchy.

I made a difference for dynastical titles. The heir to the throne of Spain is the Prince of Asturias alike the Prince of Wales, or the Duke of Brabant. It is not given to anyone else than to thát specific person holding thát position. The same counts for a Duchy whih is actually a real entity, like the Duchy of Lancaster or the Duchy of Cornwall.

What will the good people of Sussex miss when Harry would not be their Duke? And what difference will they see when Harry IS their Duke? Answer: zero. Make him Duke of Butlins (a chain of holiday resorts) and it would not have made any difference.

 

[Gaudete]

Can you show me anything put out by the British Republican movement that cites the gifting of dukedoms as one of their core objections to the continued existence of the monarchy?

There is a practical side to Dukedoms in that it allows Court precedence to be defined without creating a new order anytime someone marries, dies or is born. Other than that, it’s just traditional. And like most traditions it no longer has a prominent and defined purpose but does it really do untold damage to continue it?

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It is just illustrative for the emptiness of aspects of the monarchy. Look at this thread: Kendal? Noooo, Clarence! Wait, isn't Clarence seen as a bad omen? Better make him Duke of Hereford! Nah... Ross has a maculine ring, suits Harry: Duke of Ross!" Like confetti it is around the ears. Just read the papers when they, by accident, report about the royal Dukes: "another bunch of freeloaders" or "oh has that wet f*rt come out of his winter sleep?"

Never mind. Arguments are useless. Harry WILL be given a Dukedom. No matter it is Duke of Taco Bell. Just play a tune, while the Titanic sinks down. I hope a modern King will bring modernity to the royal family indeed. The children of Anne have no any title. They are all fine, I believe.

 

[Gaudete]

They’re not working members of the Royal Family and don’t attend state events. It’s totally different. And again, where’s the evidence that this business of dukedoms is causing increased republican sentiments?

 

[ACO]

I still see Sussex happening as well. I don't see Harry declining it whatsoever. He will respect whatever HM does.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

From this and many previous posts I don't think Duc is totally against the Dukedoms being given to British Princes on their wedding day- he just wants the man to embrace the city or county of his title and become their representative. So the Duke of Kent should have gone to live in Kent, William should live in Cambridge, Andrew should live in York.... I think he wants these Royal dukedoms to be like regular dukedoms where the family has an ancestral pile in the area of the country where the title originates.

 

[Gaudete]

That’s not always the case with “ordinary dukedoms” though. Plenty of Dukes don’t have ancestral estates in their Duchy.