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
 
  #601  
Old 04-30-2018, 09:50 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades CA, United States
Posts: 4,420
The Duke and Duchess of Albany is my current favorite. One can live with Sussex but Albany is very classy sounding.
__________________

__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
  #602  
Old 04-30-2018, 09:55 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,388
I like it too and it's much older than Sussex which wasn't associated with the BRF until 1801 when George III created his son Augustus Duke of Sussex. Albany was used as a ducal title by the Scottish royal family since 1398 and by the English royal family since 1604 when James I/VI gave it to his son Charles.

But because of the legal questions - the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas might have a claim - I don't think it's gonna happen.
__________________

  #603  
Old 04-30-2018, 09:57 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
The Duke and Duchess of Albany is my current favorite. One can live with Sussex but Albany is very classy sounding.
I would pick it too if it were available, but, unfortunately, as we have beeen discussing for the past two pages, it is not.

Personally, I think Parliament should impose a "statute of limitations" on claims under the Titles Deprivation Act. Never mind whether the Saxe-Coburg descendants are legitimate or not under British law; if a claim in a specific context like that has not been made in 100 years or so, the right to petition should expire.
  #604  
Old 04-30-2018, 10:01 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I would pick it too if it were available, but, unfortunately, as we have beeen discussing for the past two pages, it is not.

Personally, I think Parliament should impose a "statute of limitations" on claims under the Titles Deprivation Act. Never mind whether the Saxe-Coburg descendants are legitimate or not under British law; if a claim in a specific context like that has not been made in 100 years or so, the right to petition should expire.
That would be a very sensible solution.
  #605  
Old 04-30-2018, 10:26 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,112
I would hope that the British Parliament would have more important matters to attend to than passing legislature that would allow for a handful of titles to be used again, particularly given as hereditary titles are only granted to male members of the BRF.
  #606  
Old 04-30-2018, 10:34 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
I would hope that the British Parliament would have more important matters to attend to than passing legislature that would allow for a handful of titles to be used again, particularly given as hereditary titles are only granted to male members of the BRF.
They don't have to do that only for the Titles Deprivation Act specifically. In the past, the UK parliament used, from time to time, to pass "Statute Law Revision Acts" where a whole bunch of statutory laws that had become obsolete or unnecessary were repealed in bloc. Section 2 of the British North America Act, 1867 (now the Constitution Act, 1867) for example was repealed by one such act in 1893 (that was the section that said that the provisions of the BNA referring to HM The Queen also extended to Queen Victoria's heirs and successors in the United Kingdom).
  #607  
Old 04-30-2018, 10:44 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,388
Granting hereditary titles to males is the practice now but in the future that could change. It would seem odd if a younger son was given a title while his older sisters who preceded him in the succession weren't.

But it's also possible royal titles will be granted for life only (not hereditary). And of course it's also possible they won't be granted at all.
  #608  
Old 04-30-2018, 11:05 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
Still hoping for Clarence!!!


LaRae
  #609  
Old 05-02-2018, 08:10 AM
Stefan's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Esslingen, Germany
Posts: 5,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
Still hoping for Clarence!!!


LaRae

I also hope theys will use Clarence. It is much older and historic than Sussex. Of course there are Title Holders who don't have the best reputation but that was long ago and is is also the case with Gloucester and George V. choose it anyway for one of his sons. I found it always strange that he did not choose the Dukedom of his late older brother who was also the fiancee of Queen Mary for one of his sons.
__________________
Stefan



  #610  
Old 05-02-2018, 08:24 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
I think most all of the existing options have had former holders with not so savory reputations so not sure I'd use that to determine what title to use! But no one is asking me either LOL

Seems like Bertie or someone here pointed out a couple months ago that Clarence (along with Cambridge) were part of the same region or territory or something, historically speaking.


LaRae
  #611  
Old 05-02-2018, 08:33 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,378
Origins of the Dukedom of Clarence.

https://www.theguardian.com/notesand...,-1882,00.html
  #612  
Old 05-02-2018, 09:43 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefan View Post
I also hope theys will use Calrece. It is muc older and historic than Sussex. Of course there are Title Holders who don't have the best rreputation but that was long ago and is is also the case with Gloucester and George V. choose it anyway for one of his sons. I found it always strange that he did not choose the Dukedom of his late older brother who was also the fiancee of Queen Mary for one of his sons.
I'm guessing his older brother was still a painful memory & King George couldn't bring himself to see another person with the title. Giving it to a son would result in all sorts of newspaper articles about previous holders, including Eddy. But that's only my guess.
  #613  
Old 05-02-2018, 09:55 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 46
This is a re-post of my prediction back in December and now that we are less than 3 weeks away from the wedding, I thought this was a good time to reintroduce my theory.


First, let me say it is strongly believed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markel will be granted the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex just before their marriage in May. However, I would like to make the case that the Duke of Clarence should be strongly considered and is my personal preference.

Royal Dukedoms have generally followed one of two patterns:

1) From the "original list of 5" dukedoms established by King Edward III; Cornwall, Clarence, Lancaster, York & Gloucester.

2) Dukedoms or Earldoms from the geographic names of the Heptarchy (the 7 Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms of England prior to the unification under King Egbert); Northumbria, Kent, Wessex, Sussex, Essex, East Anglia & Mercia. Two of these larger kingdoms have been broken down into smaller geographic subdivisions. For example, East Anglia now encompasses the titles of Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridge. Mercia now encompasses Gloucester among others.

When evaluating the "original list of 5" from above, all are in use by a member of the current House of Windsor, except Clarence which is vacant. When evaluating the list from the Heptarchy, nearly all are in use. Kent and Wessex by the House of Windsor, Northumria by the House of Percy, Essex by the House of Capell, East Anglia and its geographic subdivisions are held by the Houses of Howard or Windsor. Mercia, the largest of the former kingdoms, it's geographic subdivisions are already tied up in dukedom or earldom titles, and finally Sussex which is vacant.

At this point, the choice between Clarence and Sussex is a toss-up. Some would (and do) argue that Clarence should not be chosen due to some of the negative character associations connected to this title. However, we have recently learned that Prince Harry and Meghan Markel share common royal ancestry, both descending from Lionel of Antwerp, the 1st Duke of Clarence, the second son of King Edward III (according to American Ancestors by the New England Historic Genealogical Society) View this link https://www.americanancestors.org/up...rkle-chart.pdf This shared common ancestry back to the original Duke of Clarence would seem to make this a very logical choice? In addition, Prince William Henry of Wales was Duke of Clarence before he became King William IV so there are some very positive traits associated with the title as well. For those that still argue against the title of Clarence, I would suggest, what better couple could change the perception of the Clarence title in a more positive light than Prince Harry and Meghan?

As mentioned above, I do believe Sussex is going to be the more likely choice, however, there is an opportunity for the House of Windsor to grant and hold the final title from the “original list of 5” all within the current royal family.

We now wait and see.
  #614  
Old 05-02-2018, 09:59 PM
Princess Larisa's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: ., Croatia
Posts: 3,670
I’m really hoping it’s not Sussex, just because everyone is taking it for granted that it will be Sussex.
I’m contrary that way
  #615  
Old 05-02-2018, 10:00 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades CA, United States
Posts: 4,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princess Larisa View Post
Iím really hoping itís not Sussex, just because everyone is taking it for granted that it will be Sussex. Iím contrary that way.
Not only you but Harry! He likes to do the unexpected, so we shall see!
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
  #616  
Old 05-02-2018, 10:03 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,537
Thank you! I was trying to remember this post the other day! Makes perfect sense. And you will have the Wales branch of the family with all the 'C' dukedoms - Cornwall, Cambridge and Clarence.

Can you all imagine....Camilla, Kate and Meghan on an engagement together.....the Duchesses of Cornwall, Cambridge and Clarence. Nice ring to it.
  #617  
Old 05-02-2018, 10:37 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmsteepy View Post
This is a re-post of my prediction back in December and now that we are less than 3 weeks away from the wedding, I thought this was a good time to reintroduce my theory.


First, let me say it is strongly believed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markel will be granted the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex just before their marriage in May. However, I would like to make the case that the Duke of Clarence should be strongly considered and is my personal preference.

Royal Dukedoms have generally followed one of two patterns:

1) From the "original list of 5" dukedoms established by King Edward III; Cornwall, Clarence, Lancaster, York & Gloucester.

2) Dukedoms or Earldoms from the geographic names of the Heptarchy (the 7 Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms of England prior to the unification under King Egbert); Northumbria, Kent, Wessex, Sussex, Essex, East Anglia & Mercia. Two of these larger kingdoms have been broken down into smaller geographic subdivisions. For example, East Anglia now encompasses the titles of Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridge. Mercia now encompasses Gloucester among others.

When evaluating the "original list of 5" from above, all are in use by a member of the current House of Windsor, except Clarence which is vacant. When evaluating the list from the Heptarchy, nearly all are in use. Kent and Wessex by the House of Windsor, Northumria by the House of Percy, Essex by the House of Capell, East Anglia and its geographic subdivisions are held by the Houses of Howard or Windsor. Mercia, the largest of the former kingdoms, it's geographic subdivisions are already tied up in dukedom or earldom titles, and finally Sussex which is vacant.

At this point, the choice between Clarence and Sussex is a toss-up. Some would (and do) argue that Clarence should not be chosen due to some of the negative character associations connected to this title. However, we have recently learned that Prince Harry and Meghan Markel share common royal ancestry, both descending from Lionel of Antwerp, the 1st Duke of Clarence, the second son of King Edward III (according to American Ancestors by the New England Historic Genealogical Society) View this link https://www.americanancestors.org/up...rkle-chart.pdf This shared common ancestry back to the original Duke of Clarence would seem to make this a very logical choice? In addition, Prince William Henry of Wales was Duke of Clarence before he became King William IV so there are some very positive traits associated with the title as well. For those that still argue against the title of Clarence, I would suggest, what better couple could change the perception of the Clarence title in a more positive light than Prince Harry and Meghan?

As mentioned above, I do believe Sussex is going to be the more likely choice, however, there is an opportunity for the House of Windsor to grant and hold the final title from the ďoriginal list of 5Ē all within the current royal family.

We now wait and see.

Can I 'steal' this for a conversation elsewhere?


LaRae
  #618  
Old 05-02-2018, 10:52 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 46
Sure, no problem :)
  #619  
Old 05-02-2018, 11:11 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
Thank you!


LaRae
  #620  
Old 05-02-2018, 11:19 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bellevue, United States
Posts: 1,388
I like Clarence too and agree it shouldn't be eliminated due do any previous associations. As cmsteepy points out it's one of the original ducal titles and has been associated with the Royal Family since the 14th century. Sussex didn't become a royal title until 1801.

One possible reason why Clarence might not be an option: Queen Victoria's son Leopold was created Duke of Albany, Earl of Clarence, and Baron Arklow in 1881. That's why the Queen gave her grandson Albert Victor a double title - Duke of Clarence and Avondale - when he was made a duke in 1890. It was considered necessary to avoid having both a Duke of Clarence and an Earl of Clarence.

As discussed earlier, Leopold's son Charles Edward, the 2nd Duke of Albany (and Earl of Clarence) lost his British titles due to the Titles Deprivation Act but his descendants may have the right to request a reinstatement. I don't think this would ever happen, but it's the reason Albany will probably be off-limits for Harry, and possibly Clarence too.
__________________

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
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia baptism biography britain british british royal family buckingham palace camilla's family camilla parker bowles china chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries crown jewels customs daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex elizabeth ii family life fashion and style genetics george vi gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan hello! henry viii hereditary grand duke guillaume history jack brooksbank japan japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii książ castle lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers luxembourg medical monarchy mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee politics portugal prince charles of luxembourg prince harry queen consort queen louise solomon j solomon spanish royal family speech st edward sussex swedish queen taiwan thai royal family tradition united states wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:31 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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