The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
View Poll Results: What Dukedom will Prince Harry receive upon marriage?
Duke of Clarence 63 25.71%
Duke of Sussex 112 45.71%
Duke of Kendal 8 3.27%
Duke of Ross 8 3.27%
Duke of Hereford 6 2.45%
Duke of Windsor 13 5.31%
Duke of Buckingham 8 3.27%
Something 'New' (Please specify) 8 3.27%
An Earldom (Please specify) 4 1.63%
Nothing - he and Meghan will remain Prince and Princess Henry of Wales 9 3.67%
Other (Please specify) 6 2.45%
Voters: 245. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #321  
Old 12-03-2017, 08:21 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,166
So the general tendence is that it indeed means nothing. Harry "needs" a dukedom to have an ermine robe to swipe the floor with and a reason go have a coronet on his head. That it is named Nottingham, Clacton or Brixton says comma zero comma. Best argument to stop it. I have "lost" my believe in the Dukedoms since that completely out-of-the-blue choice of "Cambridge" for William. A city he has no any relation, achievement, history or whatever to. Then the dime felt on the right place: make the dude Duke of Showaddywaddy: there is no any link required.
__________________

  #322  
Old 12-03-2017, 09:10 AM
Gaudete's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: South East Coast, United Kingdom
Posts: 514
Possible Dukedom for Harry and Meghan

You seem a little obsessed with ermine robes. As I said in an earlier response (which you didnít acknowledge), what youíre suggesting is that they take on some kind of devolved monarchical duties in one area which is totally impractical. It isnít that it doesnít mean anything, to the contrary, itís important because of the position and rank that it will give Harry. Itís not the territorial designation that matters, itís the rank that comes with being a royal duke.

If you donít approve thatís fine but I think itís something youíll have to learn to live with. Itís a tradition, it has a practical side to it and itís also a personal gift from the Sovereign. Itís the way itís done. And will continue to be done.
__________________

  #323  
Old 12-03-2017, 09:23 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
THe only reason that I can see Harry possibility not getting a dukedom is if Charles would want to bestow that honor on his son one day. And you can bet the palace would take pains to emphasize that.
  #324  
Old 12-03-2017, 09:36 AM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,661
Regarding the discussion on senior/minor members: If we look at the formal order of precedence (although the Queen seems to have moved away from it by moving William up in practice) for male members to keep it simple, it is clear that relation to the monarch is most important.

The monarch (the Queen granted her husband rank above all men, except for situations in which her heir has to have prominence) - Philip
The prince Wales/Duke of Cornwall - Charles
Younger sons of monarch (promigeniture) - Andrew, Edward
Grandsons of monarch - William, Harry, James, Peter
Brothers of monarch
Uncles of monarch
Nephews of monarch - David
Cousins of monarch - Richard, Edward, Michael

Interestingly, George ranks after all royal and non-royal dukes in the UK.

So, only after Charles becomes the monarch Harry is more senior than his uncles!

The monarch - Charles
The prince Wales/Duke of Cornwall - William
Younger sons of monarch - Harry
Grandsons of monarch - George
Brothers of monarch - Andrew, Edward
Uncles of monarch
Nephews of monarch - James, Peter
Cousins of monarch - David
[Cousins (once removed) of monarch - Richard, Edward, Michael - my assumption that grandsons of a monarch will always be included with the royal family - certainly royal dukes rank above other dukes]
  #325  
Old 12-03-2017, 01:54 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 301
I would be extremely surprised if Harry is not made a Duke. As has been noted, whereas Charles has three siblings, William & Harry are the "star" royals of their generation and there are just two of them. Not only that but Charles, Camilla & Anne are approaching 70 and are likely to be in their mid-late 70s, maybe even older, before Charles becomes King. Andrew & Edward will most likely be in their sixties by then as well. With William's children so young, Harry is going to be very high profile for the next 25-30 years.

Moreover, under the 'rules' as they stand, Harry's children will not be Prince(ss) and won't have an HRH. If they're children of a Duke, the oldest (?son) will be able to use their father's second title as a courtesy title. The others - and all of them if Harry is nt a Duke - will be Lord/Lady x Mountbatten.

Given recent changes to the rules concerning the order of succession, I wonder if the Queen will decree that Harry's title is to pass to the oldest child or to the oldest son.
  #326  
Old 12-03-2017, 01:57 PM
Gaudete's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: South East Coast, United Kingdom
Posts: 514
I donít think Her Majesty would do that. It could cause legal problems from the likes of Julian Fellowes who are very sore that their daughters canít inherit in the same way sons might. It could be seen as ďone rule for them and another for usĒ and could be a tad embarrassing.
  #327  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:03 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaudete View Post
I donít think Her Majesty would do that. It could cause legal problems from the likes of Julian Fellowes who are very sore that their daughters canít inherit in the same way sons might. It could be seen as ďone rule for them and another for usĒ and could be a tad embarrassing.
Agreed. I don't see the Queen change the rules for Harry unless it's changed for all peerage. Which I don't know if the Queen has the power to do? Or is that by act of Parliament?
  #328  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:05 PM
Gaudete's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: South East Coast, United Kingdom
Posts: 514
The Queen can change the rules for Harry simply by including it in the Letters Patent creating him a Duke. Much in the same way that alternative arrangements were made for Lord Mountbattenís eldest daughter Patricia. But to change the rules for all peers would require an act of parliament which is unlikely to be introduced any time soon.
  #329  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:12 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,112
I donít see it happening (she didnít do it for William, i donít see her doing it for Harry), but I disagree that it would be ďone set of rulesĒ for ďusĒ and one for ďthemĒ. If Harry got a title with gender neutral succession, it would be setting a precedent for future hereditary title creations - we could then assume that any future titles created for George, Charlotte, Baby 3, and even the DoE title for Edward, would have gender neutral successions.

The Queen does not have the ability to change the succession rules for existing peerages. Only Parliament can do that - and the Queen creating a title with gender neutral succession for Harry could actually be seen as encouragement for the movements to get Parliament to change the succession rules to all peerages.
  #330  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:16 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
I donít see it happening (she didnít do it for William, i donít see her doing it for Harry), but I disagree that it would be ďone set of rulesĒ for ďusĒ and one for ďthemĒ. If Harry got a title with gender neutral succession, it would be setting a precedent for future hereditary title creations - we could then assume that any future titles created for George, Charlotte, Baby 3, and even the DoE title for Edward, would have gender neutral successions.
The one problem this would create is for Prince Edward's children. Currently, Viscount Severn is his heir. If that were to be changed when he becomes the Duke of Edinburgh, then Lady Louise would be his heir rather than Viscount Severn. So James would be without title in favor of his sister.
  #331  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:21 PM
Gaudete's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: South East Coast, United Kingdom
Posts: 514
Possible Dukedom for Harry and Meghan

I canít see it being an issue for James. If a change in the law did occur, they would most likely use the changes made to the Succession Act as a precedent which made changes for prospective heirs and wasnít enforced retroactively. In this way, James could keep his inheritance and the new law would only affect his own children in the distant future.
  #332  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:23 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: MalmŲ, Sweden
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
The one problem this would create is for Prince Edward's children. Currently, Viscount Severn is his heir. If that were to be changed when he becomes the Duke of Edinburgh, then Lady Louise would be his heir rather than Viscount Severn. So James would be without title in favor of his sister.
If an eventual Dukedom was made inheritable by the eldest child it would change nothing for James Severn. He'd still be first in line to the title Earl of Wessex.
  #333  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:24 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
The one problem this would create is for Prince Edward's children. Currently, Viscount Severn is his heir. If that were to be changed when he becomes the Duke of Edinburgh, then Lady Louise would be his heir rather than Viscount Severn. So James would be without title in favor of his sister.

Not true.

Currently, James is the heir to the title Earl of Wessex and all its subsidiary titles.

If the Duke of Edinburgh title was created with gender neutral succession, it would only affect the succession of that title, not the Earl of Wessex title.

In that event, both James and Louise would inherit. Which I doubt Edward would have a problem with, although Iím sure Andrew would be mad about.
  #334  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:30 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
The one problem this would create is for Prince Edward's children. Currently, Viscount Severn is his heir. If that were to be changed when he becomes the Duke of Edinburgh, then Lady Louise would be his heir rather than Viscount Severn. So James would be without title in favor of his sister.
Not at all. James is still heir to the Earl of Wessex title. It would simply mean that Louise would be the future Duchess of Edinburgh, and her brother Earl of Wessex. Since the titles come with no land, money, position or so on there is no real issue with having two different holders of the titles.

With succession to the throne now equal, the aristocracy really needs to be considered. It is quite clear from at least some of the aristocrats, that they would like a change to the succession, that only daughters lose the titles and estates of their father. Maybe passing a rule that the change only applies from the date it was issued, but those families without a male heir, can apply to the queen to have it apply to the current line. Spain has shown the changes can be made, be nice to see UK follow suit.

But will not hold my breath on that ever happening. But would be nice at least among the children of the monarch, if the titles they create, were.
  #335  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:32 PM
Gaudete's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: South East Coast, United Kingdom
Posts: 514
I think most people would agree that changes should be made but the issue is that itís not a legislative priority and it wouldnít look too good if the government were to focus on peers at a time when a pledge to slash the numbers has been rather quickly abandoned. So it should happen but I canít see that it will.
  #336  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:32 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Not at all. James is still heir to the Earl of Wessex title. It would simply mean that Louise would be the future Duchess of Edinburgh, and her brother Earl of Wessex. Since the titles come with no land, money, position or so on there is no real issue with having two different holders of the titles.

With succession to the throne now equal, the aristocracy really needs to be considered. It is quite clear from at least some of the aristocrats, that they would like a change to the succession, that only daughters lose the titles and estates of their father. Maybe passing a rule that the change only applies from the date it was issued, but those families without a male heir, can apply to the queen to have it apply to the current line. Spain has shown the changes can be made, be nice to see UK follow suit.

But will not hold my breath on that ever happening. But would be nice at least among the children of the monarch, if the titles they create, were.
Hmm, that's interesting. I didn't know that the children of the aristocracy would lose the Estate as well. But still, I don't think Queen is the type of person to do this type of thing. Could be accused that she's trying to affect policy, which is firmly in Parliament's power.
  #337  
Old 12-03-2017, 02:40 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
Not true.

Currently, James is the heir to the title Earl of Wessex and all its subsidiary titles.

If the Duke of Edinburgh title was created with gender neutral succession, it would only affect the succession of that title, not the Earl of Wessex title.

In that event, both James and Louise would inherit. Which I doubt Edward would have a problem with, although I’m sure Andrew would be mad about.
It would be a Iittle weird if the Duke of Edinburg title would be the only one without subsidiary titles...

I don't expect Harry's title to be equal promigeniture (nor the expected new creation of the Duke of Edinburgh title), maybe such a provision will be made for the next generation but not yet.
  #338  
Old 12-03-2017, 04:30 PM
HereditaryPrincess's Avatar
Heir Apparent
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 13,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I don't think they will remain as Prince and Princess Henry of Wales as most people already don't understand the British way of doing titles but to have a woman called Princess Henry would seem strange.

They also wouldn't remain 'of Wales' as once Charles becomes King, Harry won't be 'of Wales' anymore. They would then be HRH The Prince and Princess Henry.

I do think they will get a Dukedom but I also wouldn't be surprised to see them get and Earldom to clearly distinguish the fact that Harry's line is the minor line and that he himself is a minor royal these days. Andrew was often described as a minor royal from the birth of Harry on and Harry is now lower in the succession than Andrew was when he was so described and Andrew is still the second son of the monarch which Harry has yet to become - so both are minor royals and moving more and more into minor league territory as they move further and further from the throne (relationship to the monarch doesn't determine the status of major and minor but place in the line of succession).
I don't think they will remain prince and princess much either, but there was a small feeling that made me think this could be a slim possibility.
For now, if the slim chance became a reality, they would remain Prince and Princess of Wales, but you're right, when Charles becomes king, they won't keep the title as those will go to Prince George and Princess Charlotte, Baby Cambridge no. 3 and any other additional children the Cambridges may have.
__________________
"For beautiful eyes, look for the good in others; for beautiful lips, speak only words of kindness; and for poise, walk with the knowledge that you are never alone". Audrey Hepburn

*
"Think of all the beauty still left around you and be happy". Anne Frank
  #339  
Old 12-03-2017, 05:20 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: MalmŲ, Sweden
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
It would be a Iittle weird if the Duke of Edinburg title would be the only one without subsidiary titles...

I don't expect Harry's title to be equal promigeniture (nor the expected new creation of the Duke of Edinburgh title), maybe such a provision will be made for the next generation but not yet.
If, a big if, the new Dukedom of Edinburgh was to be inherited through absolute primogeniture there would be created subsidiary titles for it. That said the Duke of Somerset have only one subsidiary title while some other dukes have truckloads of titles.
  #340  
Old 12-03-2017, 05:23 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by HereditaryPrincess View Post
I don't think they will remain prince and princess much either, but there was a small feeling that made me think this could be a slim possibility.
For now, if the slim chance became a reality, they would remain Prince and Princess of Wales, but you're right, when Charles becomes king, they won't keep the title as those will go to Prince George and Princess Charlotte, Baby Cambridge no. 3 and any other additional children the Cambridges may have.
It's possible that Prince Charles would like to bestow the title on one of his sons himself. But if that's the case, the Palace would probably explain it as they did with Edward.
__________________

Closed Thread


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
Harry and Meghan: Wedding Suggestions and Musings soapstar The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 5538 05-19-2018 06:37 AM
Which dukedom will inherit the first child of Victoria and Daniel? principessa Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel and Family 24 02-25-2012 02:20 AM




Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian baptism british british royal family british royals camilla's family camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house commonwealth countries crown jewels customs daisy doge of venice duchess of sussex duke of sussex elizabeth ii family tree fashion and style genetics george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan hello! highgrove history hochberg house of windsor jack brooksbank japan japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers luxembourg monarchist movements monarchists mongolia pless politics prince harry queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry royalty of taiwan speech st edward suthida swedish queen taiwan thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:04 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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