Future Titles and Dukedoms for the Wales Children

[Mbruno]

Hello all. Just curious about this. If the Earl of Wessex son ,once Edward became Duke of Edinburgh, became Earl of Wessex why is it that Prince George did not become Duke of Cambridge. Thanks.

For the same reason, I suppose, that Archie uses the title of Prince Archie of Sussex rather than Earl of Dumbarton. A title of Prince (with the territorial designation of your father's main title) supersedes a subsidiary title held by your father in the peerage of the United KIngdom, which is used by a peer's eldest son only by courtesy anyway, rather than is his own right.

All things being equal, James should be known as Prince James of Edinburgh rather than Earl of Wessex. He doesn't use his princely title by his parents' choice (and, presumably, after he turns 18, by his own choice, as is the case now of his sister too).

Note also that, again, James is not the Earl of Wessex. His father is. But, under the Letters Patent of 1917, he would be a Prince of the United Kingdom in his own right.

 

[tommy100]

I think in time Charlotte will definitely become Princess Royal if the title becomes available at a suitable point in her lifetime. (It actually wouldn't surprise me if Anne take a cue from her mother and Camilla's title and at some point indicates she would like Charlotte to have the title)

As things stand there is no law that grants a female a Dukedom or other peerage that means her husband gets a title as well. Until such time that there is might well be that there is no need for Charlotte to get a dukedom as she will very likely one day be Princess Royal IMO and when she does whatever dukedom she has will be tied up with her but rarely used. Perhaps if she marries before becoming Princess Royal William will grant her husband a peerage and she will take the feminine form with the addition of HRH but to be honest I think that unlikely.

I think when William is King we will see:

The Prince of Wales - George
The Princess Charlotte and then when Anne sadly passes on The Princess Royal - Charlotte
The Duke of Cambridge (for his lifetime) - Louis

I definitely agree that royal dukedoms will be (or certainly should be) granted for lifetime only following the recent Edinburgh / Wessex example.

That all said, I'm all for a complete revision of the way men marrying into the RF get treated. I'd be happy for Charlotte's husband to get a royal title to match his wives and any sister in law, or indeed for the notion of ladies marrying in to the RF not to get automatic titles but that is a whole other conversation.

 

[Stefan]

For the same reason, I suppose, that Archie uses the title of Prince Archie of Sussex rather than Earl of Dumbarton. A title of Prince (with the territorial designation of your father's main title) supersedes a subsidiary title held by your father in the peerage of the United KIngdom.

All things being equal, James should be known as Prince James of Edinburgh rather than Earl of Wessex. He doesn't use his princely title by his parents' choice (and, presumably, after he turns 18, by his own choice, as is the case now of his sister too).

Inded. The same as the present Duke of Gloucester and his older brother were Prince Wiliam btw Prince Richard of Gloucester during the lifetime of his father and the present Duke of Kent was Prince Edward of Kent.

 

[meeralakshmi]

It worked out pretty badly for Edward as the expectation at the time was clearly for Edward to receive a regular peerage like his brother but he ended up with a personal one. And I don't think he expected to wait until well after his nephews already had dukedoms of their own. He seemed very relieved when his wife finally was duchess, so it must have stung to wait for it so long and be given a demoted version.

The basic issue with this idea imho is that the person who makes the promise is not able to fulfill it him/herself but relies on someone else to hopefully do what they themselves can't do because it can only happen after their death. So, I would not recommend going that route again.

Didn’t Edward ask to be created Earl of Wessex on his wedding day? The earldom of Wessex is a hereditary peerage that James will inherit when Edward dies.

For the same reason, I suppose, that Archie uses the title of Prince Archie of Sussex rather than Earl of Dumbarton. A title of Prince (with the territorial designation of your father's main title) supersedes a subsidiary title held by your father in the peerage of the United KIngdom, which is used by a peer's eldest son only by courtesy anyway, rather than is his own right.

All things being equal, James should be known as Prince James of Edinburgh rather than Earl of Wessex. He doesn't use his princely title by his parents' choice (and, presumably, after he turns 18, by his own choice, as is the case now of his sister too).

Note also that, again, James is not the Earl of Wessex. His father is. But, under the Letters Patent of 1917, he would be a Prince of the United Kingdom in his own right.

He may ask to be Prince James of Edinburgh when he turns 18, we don’t know that he’ll do the same as his sister.

I think in time Charlotte will definitely become Princess Royal if the title becomes available at a suitable point in her lifetime. (It actually wouldn't surprise me if Anne take a cue from her mother and Camilla's title and at some point indicates she would like Charlotte to have the title)

As things stand there is no law that grants a female a Dukedom or other peerage that means her husband gets a title as well. Until such time that there is might well be that there is no need for Charlotte to get a dukedom as she will very likely one day be Princess Royal IMO and when she does whatever dukedom she has will be tied up with her but rarely used. Perhaps if she marries before becoming Princess Royal William will grant her husband a peerage and she will take the feminine form with the addition of HRH but to be honest I think that unlikely.

I think when William is King we will see:

The Prince of Wales - George
The Princess Charlotte and then when Anne sadly passes on The Princess Royal - Charlotte
The Duke of Cambridge (for his lifetime) - Louis

I definitely agree that royal dukedoms will be (or certainly should be) granted for lifetime only following the recent Edinburgh / Wessex example.

That all said, I'm all for a complete revision of the way men marrying into the RF get treated. I'd be happy for Charlotte's husband to get a royal title to match his wives and any sister in law, or indeed for the notion of ladies marrying in to the RF not to get automatic titles but that is a whole other conversation.

They can create Charlotte a duchess even if her spouse unfortunately can’t share the title (though they can probably issue letters patent for that). Charles has said he wants to so hopefully he or William does.

 

[Somebody]

For the same reason, I suppose, that Archie uses the title of Prince Archie of Sussex rather than Earl of Dumbarton. A title of Prince (with the territorial designation of your father's main title) supersedes a subsidiary title held by your father in the peerage of the United KIngdom, which is used by a peer's eldest son only by courtesy anyway, rather than is his own right.
(...)

Before Archie became a prince his parents decided they didn't want to use the subsidiary title of 'Earl of Dumbarton', which is why he was known as 'master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor' for the first few years of his life.

I think in time Charlotte will definitely become Princess Royal if the title becomes available at a suitable point in her lifetime. (It actually wouldn't surprise me if Anne take a cue from her mother and Camilla's title and at some point indicates she would like Charlotte to have the title) (...)

Why would Anne be expected to give up her title for someone else to be able to have it? What 'cue' of her mother regarding Camilla's title are you referring to that might point her in that direction? I don't think any previous Princess Royal ever gave a thought to 'giving up' the title that was rightfully theirs? In this case, Anne is the daughter of the previous monarch (and only got the title 30 years into her mother's reign!); while Charlotte is only the daughter of a heir. So, there is no rush. Charlotte will most likely get the title at some point when her father is king and her great-aunt is no longer among the living.

They can create Charlotte a duchess even if her spouse unfortunately can’t share the title (though they can probably issue letters patent for that). Charles has said he wants to so hopefully he or William does.

Can you refer to the specific wording where Charles states that he wants Charlotte to become a Duchess? Lots of ideas have been ascribed to him based on hearsay, so I'd love to see the specific source and his specific words on this issue.

 

[meeralakshmi]

Can you refer to the specific wording where Charles states that he wants Charlotte to become a Duchess? Lots of ideas have been ascribed to him based on hearsay, so I'd love to see the specific source and his specific words on this issue.

It was a royal biographer who said so: King Charles wants Princess Charlotte to take new royal title—Book

 

[Somebody]

It was a royal biographer who said so: King Charles wants Princess Charlotte to take new royal title—Book

Thanks for referencing the source! It seems his biographer draws unfounded far-fetched conclusions (in April 2023 - but the book of course was most likely written before Charles did award the Edinburgh peerage to his brother) because it is quite a gamble to make Edward the Duke of Edinburgh in March 2023 if Charles' intention is to make Charlotte the Duchess of Edinburgh on her wedding day. Does he either expect Edward to die young (after all Edward was 59 when he got the title - and if he has the longevity of his parents could be around for another 30-40 years) or Charlotte (turning 10 this year) to marry late?

 

[meeralakshmi]

Thanks for referencing the source! It seems his biographer draws unfounded far-fetched conclusions (in April 2023) because it is quite a gamble to make Edward the Duke of Edinburgh in March 2023 if Charles' intention is to make Charlotte the Duchess of Edinburgh on her wedding day. Does he either expect Edward to die young (after all Edward was 59 when he got the title - and if he has the longevity of his parents could be around for another 30-40 years) or Charlotte (turning 10 this year) to marry late?

It seems like they considered giving it to Charlotte and then gave it to Edward. They could always give her another duchy though, she certainly deserves it for being the first female spare to not lose the position to a younger brother.

 

[Somebody]

It has been promised to Edward about 25 years earlier, so I would hope it was never a serious consideration to give it to Charlotte instead.

 

[meeralakshmi]

It has been promised to Edward about 25 years earlier, so I would hope it was never a serious consideration to give it to Charlotte instead.

When was that stated?

 

[Somebody]

When was that stated?

In an official statement by Queen Elizabeth II at the occasion of their marriage. You may want to read up read on the thread dedicated to this issue. Previously, it had also been discussed in the general British title thread.

 

[Stefan]

When was that stated?

At the day of his Wedding

 

[muriel]

What i also dislike it that one is hereditary and the other not. Even more so as the one Couple has ceased to be working Royals and the other is very hard working fot the Crown.

I think all royal Dukedoms, barring Lancaster and Cornwall for obvious reasons, should no longer be hereditary, and should revert to the Crown when the holder of the title passes.

 

[Mbruno]

I think all royal Dukedoms, barring Lancaster and Cornwall for obvious reasons, should no longer be hereditary, and should revert to the Crown when the holder of the title passes.

Lancaster and Cornwall are not exactly hereditary either, but more like held ex-officio.

The issue with hereditary royal dukedoms is that, over time, they also add to the number of non-royal dukes. That is not a problem per se, unless there is a goal to keep the class of non-royal dukes as a closed class.

Right now, Cambridge and Edinburgh will eventually revert to the Crown, and York by accident has no heirs, but Sussex, Gloucester and Kent are titles that will be carried over (probably) to the next generation and, possibly, beyond that. The Dukedom of Kent in particular has lots of eligible male-line successors , with the potential of lingering for multiple generations, and the Dukedom of Gloucester already has living heirs covering two more generations, despite being still a short line of succession.

 

[meeralakshmi]

Lancaster and Cornwall are not exactly hereditary either, but more like held ex-officio.

The issue with hereditary royal dukedoms is that, over time, they also add to the number of non-royal dukes. That is not a problem per se, unless there is a goal to keep the class of non-royal dukes as a closed class.

Right now, Cambridge and Edinburgh will eventually revert to the Crown, and York by accident has no heirs, but Sussex, Gloucester and Kent are titles that will be carried over (probably) to the next generation and, possibly, beyond that. The Dukedom of Kent in particular has lots of eligible male-line successors , with the potential of lingering for multiple generations, and the Dukedom of Gloucester already has living heirs covering two more generations, despite being still a short line of succession.

I don’t think there’s an issue with more non-royal dukes/duchesses unless there’s some cost involved I’m not aware of.

 

[tommy100]

Why would Anne be expected to give up her title for someone else to be able to have it? What 'cue' of her mother regarding Camilla's title are you referring to that might point her in that direction? I don't think any previous Princess Royal ever gave a thought to 'giving up' the title that was rightfully theirs? In this case, Anne is the daughter of the previous monarch (and only got the title 30 years into her mother's reign!); while Charlotte is only the daughter of a heir. So, there is no rush. Charlotte will most likely get the title at some point when her father is king and her great-aunt is no longer among the living.

I never said Anne should give up the title, nor what it was my intent or suggestion at all. I said it wouldn't surprise me if Anne one day says she wants Charlotte to have the title, as in saying she expects Charlotte will be the next Princess Royal after her. This would save any feeling of having to have a "suitable" gap between Anne's very sad passing and Charlotte being given the title. Obviously this depends on a lot and would only ever be done if she knows for sure it is what William wants. It would be rather like her mother stating before her death that it was her sincere wish that Camilla would be know as Queen Consort, putting a stop on the talk of her being Princess Consort, Duchess of Lancaster etc. I can see Anne, as a very level headed woman, making sure its clear she expects Charlotte to be the Princess Royal after her.

 

[meeralakshmi]

I never said Anne should give up the title, nor what it was my intent or suggestion at all. I said it wouldn't surprise me if Anne one day says she wants Charlotte to have the title, as in saying she expects Charlotte will be the next Princess Royal after her. This would save any feeling of having to have a "suitable" gap between Anne's very sad passing and Charlotte being given the title. Obviously this depends on a lot and would only ever be done if she knows for sure it is what William wants. It would be rather like her mother stating before her death that it was her sincere wish that Camilla would be know as Queen Consort, putting a stop on the talk of her being Princess Consort, Duchess of Lancaster etc. I can see Anne, as a very level headed woman, making sure its clear she expects Charlotte to be the Princess Royal after her.

Princess Royal has been given to the oldest daughter of the monarch as long as the previous holder of the title has passed away but it isn’t conferred automatically. Anne doesn’t need to do anything about making sure her title goes to Charlotte though I’m for getting rid of the Princess Royal title and giving princesses peerages instead.

 

[tommy100]

I'm intrigued why people think it would be better for Charlotte (or any future Princesses) to get a peerage rather than the title Princess Royal? I would say that most people get if you have a royal family you have royal titles and styles but that doesn't need to be tied to the nobility and peerages which, certainly outside of the RF, are not necessarily supported and liked all round.

 

[meeralakshmi]

I'm intrigued why people think it would be better for Charlotte (or any future Princesses) to get a peerage rather than the title Princess Royal? I would say that most people get if you have a royal family you have royal titles and styles but that doesn't need to be tied to the nobility and peerages which, certainly outside of the RF, are not necessarily supported and liked all round.

The Princess Royal title can’t be shared with a spouse and children whereas a peerage can. Sons of the monarch are given peerages so their wives and kids can be titled.

 

[Somebody]

I never said Anne should give up the title, nor what it was my intent or suggestion at all. I said it wouldn't surprise me if Anne one day says she wants Charlotte to have the title, as in saying she expects Charlotte will be the next Princess Royal after her. This would save any feeling of having to have a "suitable" gap between Anne's very sad passing and Charlotte being given the title. Obviously this depends on a lot and would only ever be done if she knows for sure it is what William wants. It would be rather like her mother stating before her death that it was her sincere wish that Camilla would be know as Queen Consort, putting a stop on the talk of her being Princess Consort, Duchess of Lancaster etc. I can see Anne, as a very level headed woman, making sure its clear she expects Charlotte to be the Princess Royal after her.

Thanks for the clarification. I misunderstood. However, I don't see a point in Anne stating anything about the title that is likely to be given to Charlotte by her father any way as the one and only (and therefore also eldest) daughter of the future king. Charlotte was always expected to become the next Princess Royal, unlike the situation with Camilla where a different expectation was raised about her title.

Note that even her name fits in:
Mary (1631-1660)
Anne (1709-1759)
Charlotte (1766-1828)
Victoria (1840-1901)
Louise (1867-1931)
Mary (1897-1965)
Anne (b. 1950)
Charlotte (b. 2015)

Anne's great aunt princess Mary received the title of Princess Royal a year after her aunt (the previous princess royal) passed away. For some reason, queen Elizabeth II waited 22 years before giving the title to her daughter but there is no reason why William should follow that example imho.

 

[tommy100]

The Princess Royal title can’t be shared with a spouse and children whereas a peerage can. Sons of the monarch are given peerages so their wives and kids can be titled.

But as far as I can see (happy to be corrected) there would be no way for Charlotte to be given a peerage and her spouse to benefit from a title. As things stand William would have to grant Charlotte's husband a peerage which Charlotte would then be able to use the female version of, but would remain her husbands if they were to divorce and should he marry again his new wife would hold the same title Charlotte did. Whereas with the title Princess Royal it is Charlotte's for life. Zara and Peter seem to have done just as well for themselves as plain old Mr and Miss/Mrs than they would have as Earl X and Lady Zara IMO.
Now, if the rules and laws change (or if I have misunderstand this this has always been possible.. )and Charlotte can be granted a peerage her husband could benefit from during their marriage then yes I see the point of that.

 

[meeralakshmi]

But as far as I can see (happy to be corrected) there would be no way for Charlotte to be given a peerage and her spouse to benefit from a title. As things stand William would have to grant Charlotte's husband a peerage which Charlotte would then be able to use the female version of, but would remain her husbands if they were to divorce and should he marry again his new wife would hold the same title Charlotte did. Whereas with the title Princess Royal it is Charlotte's for life. Zara and Peter seem to have done just as well for themselves as plain old Mr and Miss/Mrs than they would have as Earl X and Lady Zara IMO.
Now, if the rules and laws change (or if I have misunderstand this this has always been possible.. )and Charlotte can be granted a peerage her husband could benefit from during their marriage then yes I see the point of that.

I think it is possible for William to issue LP to create Charlotte a duchess in her own right and allow her to share the title with her spouse. As has been stated it does seem to be in the plans to create Charlotte a duchess.

 

[blooms_rulers]

I think it is possible for William to issue LP to create Charlotte a duchess in her own right and allow her to share the title with her spouse. As has been stated it does seem to be in the plans to create Charlotte a duchess.

How would you suggest that such a Letters Patent be worded? Current LsPs have nothing to do with how the spouse of a title holder is called.

 

[meeralakshmi]

How would you suggest that such a Letters Patent be worded? Current LsPs have nothing to do with how the spouse of a title holder is called.

I'm sure they'd have some way of allowing Charlotte's spouse to use her title, not sure what.

 

[tommy100]

That would open a can of worms as then surely the rest of the peerage would want the same?

I agree it should be possible, but I am not sure it is without reforms to the peerage and the way their titles work.

 

[meeralakshmi]

That would open a can of worms as then surely the rest of the peerage would want the same?

I agree it should be possible, but I am not sure it is without reforms to the peerage and the way their titles work.

A reform bill was introduced in 2023 but didn't pass. Tatiana Maria provided a more detailed breakdown of reform efforts earlier.

 

[VictoriaB]

My preference would be for any title moving forward to be conferred on the holder for life and not a hereditary peerage.

As for men and women marrying into the family (or the aristocracy in general) being treated the same, why not, as Tommy alluded to, neither gender of spouse shares the title.

With the exception of Royal Dukedoms (until Edward) all peerages or knighthoods are for life only and should be conferred for services to the nation (whether they are is another matter and a different conversation). That does not necessarily mean the spouse has similarly performed great service to the nation so why should they share the honour?

Or maybe the honoree is divorced and recently remarried, the person who has supported them for 40 years gets nothing while the spouse of a New York minute gets to swan around as Lord or Lady Whatever for the rest of their lives including after divorce.

Personally, I prefer honours to be earned.

 

[meeralakshmi]

My preference would be for any title moving forward to be conferred on the holder for life and not a hereditary peerage.

As for men and women marrying into the family (or the aristocracy in general) being treated the same, why not, as Tommy alluded to, neither gender of spouse shares the title.

With the exception of Royal Dukedoms (until Edward) all peerages or knighthoods are for life only and should be conferred for services to the nation (whether they are is another matter and a different conversation). That does not necessarily mean the spouse has similarly performed great service to the nation so why should they share the honour?

Or maybe the honoree is divorced and recently remarried, the person who has supported them for 40 years gets nothing while the spouse of a New York minute gets to swan around as Lord or Lady Whatever for the rest of their lives including after divorce.

Personally, I prefer honours to be earned.

Many peerages in the UK are hereditary actually.

 

[JR76]

Many peerages in the UK are hereditary actually.

The practice of awarding hereditary peerages might not be illegal, but has all but been discontinued. The last hereditary peerage was awarded in 1984 which in turn was only the third non-royal peerage awarded since 1964.

 

[Biri]

I prefer hereditary peerages - at least we may know who is the child of whom