Possible Dukedom for Harry and Meghan

[O-H Anglophile]

All I can think of when I see Ross is Mike Ross, Rachel Zane's (Meghan's character on Suits) love interest.

I still love the ring of 'Duke and Duchess of Ross' for this couple - but Meghan's last act as an actress was to become 'mrs Mike Ross', so I wonder whether that would be taken into account in the decision.

Yes, Mike Ross is what I think of too--I mentioned that back last November early on in the thread.?

 

[cmsteepy]

not to stray too far off topic, but i did want to comment - love the idea of the Cambridge dukedom living on through Louis

Yes, I agree that would be interesting, however, Prince George is in line to inherit the Cambridge title. On the other hand, Prince George is in line for a whole lot of other titles, i.e., Cornwall, Rothesay, Wales & King. Cambridge certainly seems like something that could be given up and granted to his brother Prince Louis. It could be a situation where once Prince William is King, and Louis is ready to get married in +/- 30 years, William will grant the title to Louis if York is not available.

 

[Gawin]

Yes, Mike Ross is what I think of too--I mentioned that back last November early on in the thread.?

Sorry, I didn't see your earlier post, that was before I joined Royal Forums.

 

[Gawin]

Yes, I agree that would be interesting, however, Prince George is in line to inherit the Cambridge title. On the other hand, Prince George is in line for a whole lot of other titles, i.e., Cornwall, Rothesay, Wales & King. Cambridge certainly seems like something that could be given up and granted to his brother Prince Louis. It could be a situation where once Prince William is King, and Louis is ready to get married in +/- 30 years, William will grant the title to Louis if York is not available.

George will only inherit Cambridge if William dies before Charles. Once William becomes King the title will merge with the Crown.

 

[cmsteepy]

Oh I am..for Clarence!
It is at least in the realm of possibility!!!!


I think it is more than just a possibility. As I have laid out my theory earlier on this subject I think it probably got serious consideration. And . . . as others are speculating here over the last day or so about how the Royal family has been throwing surprises at us, makes me think the potential is even stronger???

 

[cmsteepy]

I would rather have Clarence, Ross or Albany...not a fan of Sussex because we already have Wessex going on.

All but one of the old Saxon kingdoms are in use including Essex which is currently an Earldom held by the Capell family. Sussex (meaning South Saxon) is the only one not in use which is why it is a leading candidate for Prince Harry. Personally, as most of you know, I am routing for Clarence.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Sorry, I didn't see your earlier post, that was before I joined Royal Forums.

I just found it funny that the idea of "of Ross" conjured up Mike Ross for someone else, not just me.

 

[Countessmeout]

Yes, I agree that would be interesting, however, Prince George is in line to inherit the Cambridge title. On the other hand, Prince George is in line for a whole lot of other titles, i.e., Cornwall, Rothesay, Wales & King. Cambridge certainly seems like something that could be given up and granted to his brother Prince Louis. It could be a situation where once Prince William is King, and Louis is ready to get married in +/- 30 years, William will grant the title to Louis if York is not available.

The only way George will be Duke of Cambridge is if William dies before his father. The moment William becomes king, the title will merge with the throne. At that point it needs to be recreated for the next holder.

All but one of the old Saxon kingdoms are in use including Essex which is currently an Earldom held by the Capell family. Sussex (meaning South Saxon) is the only one not in use which is why it is a leading candidate for Prince Harry. Personally, as most of you know, I am routing for Clarence.

Yes and no. There are several of them that aren't currently in use. The issue would be that those old kingdoms were broken up into new territories. And the new territories do have dukes and earls.

The heptarchy of the Saxon kingdoms:

the ones whose titles are not currently in use (but areas in their kingdom may have a peer already)
1. Northumbria: last earl was in the 13th century. But the area was broken into York and Northumberland
2. Mercia: last earl was in 1071. Chester and Shrewsbury are in the location now.
3. East Anglia: hasn't been used since the Norman conquest
4. Sussex: only used once, for the son of George III

those whose titles are currently in use
5. Essex: currently the 11th earl of the 9th creation
6. Kent: Duke and Duchess of Kent
7. Wessex: Earl and Countess of Wessex

 

[cmsteepy]

George will only inherit Cambridge if William dies before Charles. Once William becomes King the title will merge with the Crown.

I agree with that and once it does merge with the Crown, doesn't that make the title available for a new grant to Louis?

 

[Gawin]

I agree with that and once it does merge with the Crown, doesn't that make the title available for a new grant to Louis?

I'm sorry, I think I misunderstood your previous message. Yes, once the title merges with the Crown (because William becomes King, or George if William dies before Charles) the title can be recreated for Louis.

 

[Countessmeout]

I agree with that and once it does merge with the Crown, doesn't that make the title available for a new grant to Louis?

Yes, which I said. I was responding to your post which suggested that George was in line to inherit and 'maybe he would give it up as he was inline for so many other titles'. It will never be George's to give up.

It will not join the list of titles held by William when he is king. It will merge into the throne, and no longer exist. It will have to be Created again.

 

[cmsteepy]

The only way George will be Duke of Cambridge is if William dies before his father. The moment William becomes king, the title will merge with the throne. At that point it needs to be recreated for the next holder.



Yes and no. There are several of them that aren't currently in use. The issue would be that those old kingdoms were broken up into new territories. And the new territories do have dukes and earls.

The heptarchy of the Saxon kingdoms:

the ones whose titles are not currently in use (but areas in their kingdom may have a peer already)
1. Northumbria: last earl was in the 13th century. But the area was broken into York and Northumberland
2. Mercia: last earl was in 1071. Chester and Shrewsbury are in the location now.
3. East Anglia: hasn't been used since the Norman conquest
4. Sussex: only used once, for the son of George III

those whose titles are currently in use
5. Essex: currently the 11th earl of the 9th creation
6. Kent: Duke and Duchess of Kent
7. Wessex: Earl and Countess of Wessex

Yes, agreed with everything you have just outlined above and which I discussed previously on this thread a couple of days ago. See post #613.

 

[Countessmeout]

Then why are you contradicting yourself

YOUR post I just responded to stated that there was only one Saxon kingdom whose title wasn't in use, Sussex.

As I just showed, and you agreed, that isn't true.

People dont read every single post before responding. I was responding to your most recent post. It seems you changed your mind???

 

[cmsteepy]

Yes, which I said. I was responding to your post which suggested that George was in line to inherit and 'maybe he would give it up as he was inline for so many other titles'. It will never be George's to give up.

It will not join the list of titles held by William when he is king. It will merge into the throne, and no longer exist. It will have to be Created again.

That is true, I did suggest that George was in line to inherit Cambridge and that was based on the Wikipedia Post (I know, an unreliable source) for the Duke of Cambridge where they list the 5th Creation for William and the line of succession as 1. Prince George of Cambridge and 2. Prince Louis of Cambridge. I believe I also understand your point however, and that is Prince George only becomes Duke of Cambridge if William dies before Charles ascends the throne himself which is not a very likely scenario.?

 

[cmsteepy]

Then why are you contradicting yourself

YOUR post I just responded to stated that there was only one Saxon kingdom whose title wasn't in use, Sussex.

As I just showed, and you agreed, that isn't true.

People dont read every single post before responding. I was responding to your most recent post. It seems you changed your mind???

There in lies the problem, not everyone reads all the posts (which isn't realistic to do) and that creates confusion. I was not contradicting myself, I was agreeing with your points that the larger Saxon Kingdoms had been broken down into smaller geographic regions and I had given the earlier example of East Anglia which now encompasses the titles of Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridge. I wasn't trying to suggest that there should be a Duke of East Anglia but that a title from that old kingdom was not available because its smaller subdivisions already have titles associated with them.

Anyway, I will concede, and simply say that I am routing for Clarence but think Sussex will be the likely choice.

 

[Gawin]

Ha! Ha! Two weeks from today our debates on Harry's titles will be over & we'll begin choosing names for the children. ?

 

[Gawin]

Hmm...wonder what sounds good with Clarence? ?

 

[sarahedwards2]

Why do only married royals have titles? And why was Andrew only made Duke of York on his wedding day when George VI was Duke of York when he was still single?

 

[Gawin]

It's up to the monarch. The Queen obviously prefers to wait until the Prince marries.

 

[Stefan]

Why do only married royals have titles? And why was Andrew only made Duke of York on his wedding day when George VI was Duke of York when he was still single?

The tradition seems have started when King George V. gave his son George the title Duke of Kent upon his marriage. Since then Titles where always given upon marriage with the exception of Prince of Wales to Charles.
What i always wondered. King Geoge V. gave his son Albert the Title Duke of York in 1920 and Henry weas given Gloucester in 1928. Only with Geoge he wanted until Georg married. Is it known why he wasn't given earlier a Title like his older brothers?

 

[Pranter]

Hmm...wonder what sounds good with Clarence? ?

Well I'd say avoid George......


Phillip
David
Alexander
Richard

Alice
Sohpie
Isabelle
Frances






LaRae

 

[Gawin]

The tradition seems have started when King George V. gave his son George the title Duke of Kent upon his marriage. Since then Titles where always given upon marriage with the exception of Prince of Wales to Charles.
What i always wondered. King Geoge V. gave his son Albert the Title Duke of York in 1920 and Henry weas given Gloucester in 1928. Only with Geoge he wanted until Georg married. Is it known why he wasn't given earlier a Title like his older brothers?

Prince George had a wild side - drug addictions, inappropriate liaisons, etc. It could be George V wanted to wait until Prince George finally settled down with an acceptable bride.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Why do only married royals have titles? And why was Andrew only made Duke of York on his wedding day when George VI was Duke of York when he was still single?

The simple answer is there is no 'rule'. Each monarch makes there own decisions in their own way and when they feel they want to do so e.g. both Edward VII and George V created their eldest daughters as The Princess Royal almost as soon as official mourning for their sister had ended but the Queen took nearly 20 years after the death of her aunt before giving that title to her daughter.

She also took over 6 years to give Charles Prince of Wales while all other monarchs have done so very quickly with Edward VII even being criticised for waiting nearly 11 months.

 

[irish_royalist]

I'm loving this thread, but haven't managed to read all of it, and some of you are so knowledgable about these things!
I read the obituary of Jill, Duchess of Hamilton in The Times today, and looked up the Duke of Hamilton, since it's the principle Dukedom in Scotland. I noticed that one of his subsidiary titles is Earl of Arran and Cambridge, and obviously Prince William still became Duke of Cambridge.
Do this have any relevance to some of the suggested Dukedoms for Prince Harry?

 

[Countessmeout]

I'm loving this thread, but haven't managed to read all of it, and some of you are so knowledgable about these things!
I read the obituary of Jill, Duchess of Hamilton in The Times today, and looked up the Duke of Hamilton, since it's the principle Dukedom in Scotland. I noticed that one of his subsidiary titles is Earl of Arran and Cambridge, and obviously Prince William still became Duke of Cambridge.
Do this have any relevance to some of the suggested Dukedoms for Prince Harry?

While its not common, yes there can be an Earl and a Duke of the same region. Or Marques/earl or so on. More often not, they are the same person. Like an Earl was raised to duke, and they maintain both titles. There being an Earl of X would not rule out Harry being Duke of X.

That said, if the Earl of X was their senior peerage, it is less likely. Like making Harry Duke of Essex, when Earl of Essex is a senior peerage.

The Duke of Hamilton has a very long list of titles, 13 if you include both parts of the double titles. The Earl of Arran and Cambridge are low on the list of those titles. They aren't used as subsidiary titles by the heirs. The duke's heir is Marques of Douglas and Clydesdale. The eldest son of the Marques would be titled Earl of Angus. It is possible if four generations were alive, the fourth generation would be Earl of Arran and Cambridge but that has never happened yet.

 

[Ish]

While its not common, yes there can be an Earl and a Duke of the same region. Or Marques/earl or so on. More often not, they are the same person. Like an Earl was raised to duke, and they maintain both titles. There being an Earl of X would not rule out Harry being Duke of X.

That said, if the Earl of X was their senior peerage, it is less likely. Like making Harry Duke of Essex, when Earl of Essex is a senior peerage.

The Duke of Hamilton has a very long list of titles, 13 if you include both parts of the double titles. The Earl of Arran and Cambridge are low on the list of those titles. They aren't used as subsidiary titles by the heirs. The duke's heir is Marques of Douglas and Clydesdale. The eldest son of the Marques would be titled Earl of Angus. It is possible if four generations were alive, the fourth generation would be Earl of Arran and Cambridge but that has never happened yet.

A great-grandson of the Duke of Hamilton would most likely be styled Lord Abernathy - the style used by courtesy is a lower ranked one.

 

[Humbugged]

While its not common,

. Or Marques/earl or so on. More often not, they are the same person. Like an Earl was raised to duke, and they maintain both titles. There being an Earl of X would not rule out Harry being Duke of X.

That said, if the Earl of X was their senior peerage, it is less likely. Like making Harry Duke of Essex, when Earl of Essex is a senior peerage.

The Duke of Hamilton has a very long list of titles, 13 if you include both parts of the double titles. The Earl of Arran and Cambridge are low on the list of those titles. They aren't used as subsidiary titles by the heirs. The duke's heir is Marques of Douglas and Clydesdale. The eldest son of the Marques would be titled Earl of Angus. It is possible if four generations were alive, the fourth generation would be Earl of Arran and Cambridge but that has never happened yet.

Hamilton and Douglas (which is also half the family name ) were both in Clydesdale until they re jigged the internal county borders (again) a few years ago

In the case of the Hamiltons most of the Lanarkshire titles were folded into each other with the fall of the Black Douglas line at which point the Red line got all the titles handed off to them .

The reason they have the Cambridge title was that was what they were given at the Union of Crowns because they were at that point 4th in line to the Crown and needed an English title

 

[Rudolph]

A brand new dukedom outranks the oldest earldom. Doesn’t matter date of creation.

 

[Gawin]

I'm loving this thread, but haven't managed to read all of it, and some of you are so knowledgable about these things!
I read the obituary of Jill, Duchess of Hamilton in The Times today, and looked up the Duke of Hamilton, since it's the principle Dukedom in Scotland. I noticed that one of his subsidiary titles is Earl of Arran and Cambridge, and obviously Prince William still became Duke of Cambridge.
Do this have any relevance to some of the suggested Dukedoms for Prince Harry?

As you point out, the Duke of Hamilton holds a double title - "Earl of Arran & Cambridge" - which technically is not the same as "Cambridge." As I stated in an earlier post, two peers will NOT share the same territorial designation.

James Hamilton, 2nd Marquess of Hamilton, was created 1st Earl of Cambridge (in the peerage of England) in 1619. He was succeeded by his son James, 3rd Marquess of Hamilton and 2nd Earl of Cambridge, who was created 1st Duke of Hamilton and Earl of Arran & Cambridge (in the peerage of Scotland, separate from his English Earldom of Cambridge) in 1643. He in turn was succeeded by his brother William, 2nd Duke of Hamilton (by a special remainder) and 3rd Earl of Cambridge.

William died in 1651, leaving no sons, and the Dukedom of Hamilton and Earldom of Arran & Cambridge passed to his brother James's daughter Anne (again, under a special remainder). But the separate English Earldom of Cambridge (which wasn't subject to the special remainder) became extinct.

Charles II then created his brother Henry Duke of Gloucester and Earl of Cambridge in 1659. Cambridge has remained a royal title since that time, sometimes as an earldom and other times as a dukedom. In 1917 Queen Mary's brother was created Marquess of Cambridge. His son, the 2nd Marquess, died in 1981 when the title became extinct which is why Cambridge was available for William.

See the Cambridge entry in The Complete Peerage (published in 1912, before Queen Mary's brother became Marquess):

https://archive.org/stream/completepeerageo02coka#page/494/mode/2up

 

[Gawin]

W There being an Earl of X would not rule out Harry being Duke of X.

If someone else is already Earl of X, then Harry cannot be Duke of X. The only work-around would be to use a double title for one. Earl of X & Y and Duke of X, or vice versa.

Just as William is Duke of Cambridge and the Duke of Hamilton is Earl of Arran & Cambridge, and Charles Edward Duke of Albany was Earl of Clarence while his cousin Albert Victor was Duke of Clarence & Avondale.