Royal Dukes, Royal Duchies and Royal Ducal Titles 1: Ending 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
The previous Duke of York was the Queen's father, who became George VI. I believe the DOY before him also ascended to the throne.
 
The LPs creating Andrew as Duke of York stipulate - like any others - that it is inheritable by 'heirs male of the body'. In the past the Kent and Gloucester titles have been royal titles and yet the next holder of both of those titles will not be royal and so they will pass out of the royal sphere in the sense of the holders not being HRH.

The previous Dukes of York since Henry VIII have all either become King, only had daughters or died without legitimate issue -
Henry VIII (Henry VII's second son) became king so it merged with the Crown;
Charles I (James I's second son) became King so it merged with the Crown; James II (Charles I's second son Charles II's younger brother) became King so it merged with the Crown;
Prince Ernst Augustus (younger brother of George I - note - not the second son of a monarch as his mother was never Queen) never married;
Prince Edward (second son of the Prince of Wales and younger brother of George III - this Prince of Wales never became King as he predeceased his father) - never married;
The Prince Frederick - (second son of George III) - died without issue
The Prince George (second son of Edward VII - although created by his grandmother Queen Victoria) - became king so it merged with the Crown
The Prince Albert (second son of George V) - became King so it merged with the Crown.

Any Duke of York who has had children has become King interestingly enough - Henry VIII, Charles I, James II, George V and George VI. The others have had no children at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bertie:

Wow! That’s incredible! Thank you so much for going to the trouble of researching and posting that note. I can see what a tremendous asset you must be around these environs.

I guess just because I was familiar with no Duke of York since the unfortunate father of Edward IV outside the royal family that I just assumed that Henry VII decided to make it a title always held by the royal family by way of emphasizing that his children were the legitimate heirs to the Yorkist claim, thus (hopefully, from his viewpoint) forever ending the dynastic wars.

What are the odds of what you just reported here? No Duke of York—in all this time!—has managed to extend his line save those that became kings as you pointed out.

Thanks again, Bertie, and I hope you share my sentiment that Prince Henry never be accorded the title of Duke of Clarence! I know it’s silly to be superstitious. I prefer to position my presentiment as being one always wary of irony instead! I’ve always liked Harry ever since he was a kid. Just from the little I saw of him (through media) and read of him he impressed me as having been a real boy’s boy: None dare call him a royal wimp! I just don’t want to see him, as I said, temp fate! (Er, I guess I should hope he never reads this note for fear he will lobby his grandmother or father for the title!)
 
Last edited:
I'm sure this has been asked before, but I'm new here. Why isn't Prince Edward a duke instead of "just" an earl?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D.Schneider said:
Good question. I'm sure this has been asked before, but I'm new here. Why isn't Prince Edward a duke instead of "just" an earl?
Click to expand...

It was announced on the day of his wedding that in time, if possible, he will be created Duke of Edinburgh. This can't happen until both his parents are dead and there are scenarios where he won't be able to get it at all and where he could inherit it directly from his father. See below

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/the-future-of-the-duke-of-edinburgh-title-24343.html
 
The same ones that stopped past second and younger sons from getting Dukedoms until marriage - tradition. e.g. Charles became Duke of Cornwall et. al. on 6th February 1952 but Andrew didn't get a Dukedom until 1986 and Edward still hasn't gotten one.

George V didn't give Dukedoms to his younger sons until marriage whereas Edward VIII became The Duke of Cornwall in 1910 but George VI not until 1923.
Edward VII was a Duke at birth (as was George IV) but their younger brothers were adults.

Since Victorian times it has come with marriage rather than at any other time. Harry is the same as Andrew and Geoge VI and Alfred - the second son and will simply have to wait.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Duchessmary said:
I seriously doubt if he'll ever marry again. He's got his heirs, who needs it?
Click to expand...


He doesn't have a son to inherit his title though does he? His daughters can't continue the 'York' line only a son can so there is a reason - not pressing perhaps but still there.
 
In the British Monarchy, the title Duke of York is given to the second son of the sovereign and thus it is not hereditary to their heirs. It is unlikely this will change in the near future.
 
Actually, it is hereditary to their heirs.

As Iluvbertie has pointed out (great job), it looks like it that all of the men who have who have held the title have died without heirs, or have become Kings of England and thus the titled merged in the crown.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out with Andrew and Harry.
 
Baron Saalfeld said:
In the British Monarchy, the title Duke of York is given to the second son of the sovereign and thus it is not hereditary to their heirs. It is unlikely this will change in the near future.
Click to expand...


The summary of the LPs creating Andrew Duke of York says the following:

For granting unto H.R.H. the Prince Andrew, C.V.O. and the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten the dignities of Baron Killyleagh, Earl of Inverness and Duke of York. (C.U.H.&G.S. -- Proclamations, Letters Patent and Warrants)

This makes it absolutely clear that if Andrew has a legitimate son that son will inherit the Dukedom of York title.

It just seems that it always goes to the second son (it doesn't actually with at least one second son not getting it - Queen Victoria's and one King giving it to his younger brother - George I). The reason that it has always been available is simply the fact that every Duke of York who has had a son (actually a child) has become King and the others haven't had legitimate children. Consequently the title has always merged with the crown and thus seems to have not had the normal LPs.

Note that until this current generation much the same thing has happened with the titles Duke of Gloucester and Duke of Kent with previous holders not passing the title to son but the current creations will pass out of 'royal' hands when the current holders die.

Should the law also change to allow for gender blind succession to titles then Beatrice would inherit her father's title (that would take an Act of Parliament and may not even be on the agenda but we can't, in these days of equality, rule out that possibility).
 
Iluvbertie said:
The reason that it has always been available is simply the fact that every Duke of York who has had a son (actually a child) has become King and the others haven't had legitimate children. Consequently the title has always merged with the crown and thus seems to have not had the normal LPs.
Click to expand...

That's pretty interesting, actually...that every Duke of York who has had a legitimate child has become king. Were any of these Dukes of York actually the eldest son or grandson of a sovereign?

I feel like there should be a legend/story associated with that--you know, similar to the idea that the Grimaldis are prevented by a curse from finding lasting happiness in marriage.
 
No eldest born son has been created Duke of York but George V was the eldest living son, of the heir to the throne, when created Duke of York as his title was given to him some weeks after the death of his older brother.

A number of times the second son had been created Duke of York and then also been given Prince of Wales due to the death of their older brother e.g. Henry VIII and Charles I (along with George V). So they had been created Duke of York expecting their older brother, the Prince of Wales, to inherit but the elder brother died and then their fathers created them Prince of Wales as well.

George V's circumstances were different of course being the grandson of the monarch. He was created Duke of York even though he was then the second in line after his father and would become King and then Edward VII waited almost a year before creating him Prince of Wales so throughout 1901 he was known as Duke of Cornwall and York.

One Duke of York was the younger brother of the King when given the title (George I created his brother Duke of York) and later George II gave that title to the second son of his own eldest son.

Andrew will be the first Duke of York to have legitimate children not be become King (assuming that he doesn't of course). Henry VIII, Charles I, James II, George V, George VI all became King and the others died without legitimate children.

Whether there is a curse on the title or whether it is just coincidence I simply don't know but since the end of the Wars of the Roses that is the way it has been - title merging with the crown either due to no legitimate issue or the holder becoming King.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is no "Traditional" set of courtesy titles for the peerages as the soverign sort of makes that choice. However, its usual for a royal duke to get one English/one Scottish/one Welsh or Northern Irish. For instance, William might want something Scottish because of his college, Harry might wants something remincent of the military. As an example, one of the Duke of Edinburgh's courtesy titles is Baron Greenwich becuase he's a navy man.
 
There are no set lists and the rule these days is that the Queen and recipient work together to get a set that also reflects the range of areas within the realm. e.g. Andrew is Duke of York, Earl of Inverness and Baron Killyleagh (one in England, one in Scotland and one in Northern Ireland).
 
Thanks for the responses. I came up with a few more questions.

On this website - User:Danbarnesdavies/Royal peerages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia they list peerages by "seniority". Does the "seniority" of a title really mean anything when they decide which ones to bestow upon someone? I keep reading that most people believe William could be named Duke of Cambridge. I see that "Clarence" is listed before Cambridge. I do realize that it depends upon when it was first created and Clarence was created before Cambridge. Just didn't know if there was a distinction between peerages that are "more important" than others. Make sense? Hope so.

Also have read before - probably on one of the forums on this website - that someone wondered if William could take a title dealing with St. Andrews since that is where he went to University and where he met Kate. I know he can't be named Earl of St. Andrews but what about Duke of St. Andrews? or Duke of Clarence and St. Andrews? Would St. Andrews be less "senior" to Cambridge? Of course William will one day have other titles and the ones he may receive upon marriage will revert back to the crown.

If William was named Duke of Cambridge or Duke of St. Andrews, could Harry be named Duke of Clarence, even though it's listed as more "senior" to the other two?

Last question - I know in other royal houses that a King/Queen have made the wives of their sons a "princess in her own right". I don't believe it has happened in the British Royal Family unless there was a time in the past that it happened. What would it take for Kate to be named a Princess in her own right? or is that just not done in the British Royal Family?

Just wondering.

Thanks so much for the information. I have fun reading everything.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That doesn't appear to be any kind of official ranking. Peerages do have a seniority, but that's determined based on the date of the granting of the current creation of the peerage, and for royal peers it's not that relevant as their precedence is based on their royal status, not their peerages. (For example, after the deaths of the current Dukes of Gloucester and Kent, the new Duke of Gloucester will take precedence before the new Duke of Kent, as the current Dukedom of Gloucester was created in 1928 and the current Dukedom of Kent dates from 1934.)
 
Last edited:
Some peerages are more important that others such as Duke of Edinburgh ranks higher than Duke of Norfolk, most likely to do with land, or the person who bares the title.

Harry would get a title of lesser standing than his brother presumably, he might get additional titles when William becomes King. It all depends on what Harry wants in his future.

I don't see why Kate would become a Princess in her own right, no need. Surely she'd be satisfyed in the knowledge that one day she will hold the two most important titles Queen and Queen Mum.

Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester was allowed to be known as Princess Alice as a courtesy from the Queen.
Princess Marina, Duchess of Kent who was the last foreign princess to marry into the BRF was a princess in her own right.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lumutqueen said:
Some peerages are more important that others such as Duke of Edinburgh ranks higher than Duke of Norfolk, most likely to do with land, or the person who bares the title.
Click to expand...

Peerages of the same degree are ranked by the date of the grant of the current creation. The Dukedom of Norfolk is much more senior than the Dukedom of Edinburgh (the former dates from 1483, the latter from 1947). However, the current Duke of Edinburgh was granted precedence just after the Queen regardless of his being a Duke. Royal dukes also rank above "plain" dukes.

Edit: Actually, it's not always by date:

  • Dukes in the peerage of England
  • Dukes in the peerage of Scotland
  • Dukes in the peerage of Great Britain
  • Dukes in the peerage of Ireland (before 1801)
  • Dukes in the peerage of the United Kingdom, and Dukes in the peerages of Ireland (after 1801)
Within those categories, they're ranked by date. (I'm not sure if Scottish dukes take precedence over English dukes in Scotland, though.)
 
Last edited:
Something I don't quite understand. Can you have a Duke, Marquis or Earl of wherever even if someone is already known by a courtesy title? Example -

If you have a Marquis of Milford Haven you "can't" have an Earl of Milford Haven?

Another example - let's say there is an Earl of Cambridge (which I believe that name is not in use at the moment) but could there still be a Duke of Cambridge? or someone being a Duke and Earl of Cambridge, etc.

I hope my examples make sense!!!! :)

I knew there was an Eart of St. Andrews but didn't think it mattered when it came to the title Duke of Clarence and St. Andrews (since there is no Duke of St. Andrews from I understand).

This website User:Danbarnesdavies/Royal peerages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia lists an Earl of Sussex - that's why I mentioned it. And in all of my reading I have seen where some are titled Duke and Earl of the same name.

Thanks!!! This has been interesting and fun!
 
See, I have always assumed that there can't be more than one of a "name" no matter if its a high title or courtesy title, hence my comment about there already being a St Andrews title in use. However, I don't know for sure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hello Ashley Athena

I can understand your confusion. The duplicating of nobiliary names sometimes happens, by historical accident, or through succession. The eldest son of the Earl of Strathmore has the courtesy title, Lord Glamis, however the earl holds a very ancient title: Thane of Glamis. When a nobleman is raised to a higher degree (say from baron to earl) he may keep the territorial designation or be given another one. When a member of the Lambton family was made Earl of Durham, he was already Baron Durham.

I do hope this doesn't confuse you! There is a Dukedom of Sutherland and an Earldom of Sutherland, represented by different branches of the same family. This is because in Scotland females can inherit comital titles, but not ducal titles. The earls were raised to dukes of the same territorial designation (Sutherland), when a later duke failed male issue his ducal title went to a kinsman nearest to the first duke, but the earldom went to the duke's daughter. Also there are two earldoms of Arran, one in the Scottish peerage and one in the Irish peerage, and held by different families.
 
Why is Edward an earl and Andrew a duke? Why did Queen Elizabeth chose different titles for her two sons when they married?
 
agogo said:
Why is Edward an earl and Andrew a duke? Why did Queen Elizabeth chose different titles for her two sons when they married?
Click to expand...


It was announced at the time of Edward's marriage that if and when the title is available Edward will become the Duke of Edinburgh. That can't happen while either The Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh is alive and mightn't happen if certain other eventualities come into play. See http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/the-future-of-the-duke-of-edinburgh-title-24343.html
 
NancyJJ said:
Something I don't quite understand. Can you have a Duke, Marquis or Earl of wherever even if someone is already known by a courtesy title? Example -

If you have a Marquis of Milford Haven you "can't" have an Earl of Milford Haven?
Click to expand...

Yes, it happens. Queen Victoria created her son The Prince Leopold, Duke of Albany and Earl of Clarence, then re-created Clarence for her eldest male-line grandson, Prince Eddie, as Duke of Clarence and Avondale.

Eddie died without male issue, so the dukedom is extinct. The Earldom of Clarence is still extant, but suspended, under the Titles Deprivation Act for the descendants of Charles Eduard, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, who lost his British peerages in 1917 for bearing arms against Great Britain in World War I as a German duke.
 
Posts relating specifically to William and Harry and future offspring have been moved to the Titles and Styles of William, Harry, Wives & Children thread in the William & Harry subforum.

I know there's a degree of crossover but we'd like to keep the contents of the two threads fairly clearly defined as much as possible. For this reason discussion of possible dukedoms for Wills 'n Harry has been moved out of the 'Royal Dukes and Ducal Titles' thread.

thanks,
Warren
British Forums moderator
 
Iluvbertie

Why would the Prince Edward have to wait until H.M. died to inherit his father's ducal title? The heir to any dukedom be it royal or otherwise (they are both peerages and technically a royal dukedom is no diferent from any other peerage; the exception would be the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall) immmediately inherits the title on the death of the previous duke, though would not use the style and title until after the funeral and official mourning.

I find the current fashion for the sovereign to fudge issues to accommodate political stratergies, by limiting royal titles within her family a puzzle. We are frequently told H.M. acts on the advice of her ministers, yet by not appreciating the work of those so called "minor royals" as the Gloucesters, the Kents (including Prince Michael and Princess Alexandra) it looks a poor show.
 
If the Duke of Edinburgh died before the Queen, his title would be inherited by his eldest son, Charles; he would remain DoE until his accession to the Throne (at the Queen's death), when the title would return to the Crown. At that point he could re-create it for Edward.

If the DoE died after the Queen, the DoE title would return to the Crown, and King Charles could re-create it for Edward.

In any case, unless Charles, William, Henry and Andrew died before the DoE, Edward can become DoE only after a new creation of this title by his brother Charles (or his successor as King).
 
Hereditary Thane said:
Why would the Prince Edward have to wait until H.M. died to inherit his father's ducal title?
Click to expand...
As I said in the linked explanation the Duke of Edinburgh title is a normal royal title so inheritance is through male heirs of his body.

The line of succession to the Edinburgh title is: Charles, William, Harry, Andrew, Edward and James.

Edward therefore can't 'inherit' the Edinburgh title directly as Charles is the heir to that title just as he is the heir to his mother's titles. As a result the Edinburgh title won't be avaliable to be recreated for Edward until both the Queen and the Duke are dead and the title has merged with the crown.

However there are scenarios - spelt out in the link I put in my last post - whereby the title would never become available for Edward or he could inherit if directly although the most likely scenario is that after the death of both his parents his brother Charles created him Duke of Edinburgh in accordance with the wishes of his parents and the agreement made when Edward married.

It is not a case of Edward not using an inherited title until the death of both his parents but simply the fact that he, in all likelihood, won't be the one inheriting that title but will have to wait until it is available for regrant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lord Campbell said:
The Duchy of Windsor
Click to expand...

There are no duchies in the UK except for Lancaster and Cornwall, both of which are enjoyed by The Sovereign and the eldest son and heir in right of it in the case of Cornwall. If the Dukedom of Cornwall is vacant, the revenues accrue to The Sovereign.

George VI suggested "Windsor" as a dukedom to associate the former King with the name of the royal house and the seat of Windsor Castle. Prince Edward liked it and agreed with his brother it was appropriate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
Titles/Royal Dukedoms
Replies
4
Views
2K
Toledo
Toledo
Marengo
Royal Dukes, Royal Duchies and Royal Ducal Titles 2: 2022 -
2
Replies
36
Views
821
Tatiana Maria
T
Somebody
Earning a living as a non-full time royal
2
Replies
40
Views
4K
Silverpot
Silverpot
Marengo
Questions about British Styles and Titles 3: Aug 2023 -
2 3
Replies
87
Views
12K
Mbruno
M
Blog Real
Other Royal Pantheons of Spain (of the monarchs of Asturias, Leon, Castile, Aragon, Navarre and Others)
Replies
4
Views
764
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom