Edinburgh and Wessex Titles

[Mbruno]

What do you mean by 'taken away from the current lines of succession'? It is not the peerages that are in the line of succession but the holders of the peerage - and the future Duke of Kent (Lord Downpatrick; so not the next Duke but the one after him) is not in the line of succession as he is Roman Catholic. So, there is no relation to being in the line of succession.

I believe Tommy meant the lines of succession to the peerages, not to the Crown.

 

[tommy100]

Yes I meant the line of succession to the Dukedoms of Gloucester and Kent.

 

[Somebody]

Thanks for the clarification. I misunderstood and indeed thought about the succession to the throne. As I explained, and which was reiterated by Tatiana Maria, these are unrelated.

I am, however, a bit surprised that only the Gloucester and Kent titles are discussed and not the Sussex title that is also set to continue on as long as there are male-heirs.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

My interpretation is that he wanted the title to continue in his male-line (just like he wanted his surname to pass on from generation to generation). A life-time peerage does not follow that wish as it will be discontinued after his son dies, while that son does have a male-heir. I am pretty sure he would not have considered that Charles might divert his wish into awarding a life-time peerage instead of the peerage with the traditional male-line inheritance remainder.

That is very much a possibility, I agree, but I don't know if it can be assumed. The late Duke of Edinburgh was admittedly no advocate for gender equality - or he would not have insisted on passing on his surname when Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother never did - but on the other hand he does not seem to have had a rigidly male-line worldview. The surname he insisted on passing on was his mother's, not his father's, and in the accounts that I recall reading, he lobbied for his name to be included alongside with his wife's name, not to completely replace it. The relatives he chose to represent his birth family at his funeral were not related to him in male line.

In any event, the next two monarchs are males in direct line from Prince Philip. If all goes as Charles allegedly plans, whichever senior royal is next granted the dukedom will likely be a male-line descendant of Philip.

The 1999 agreement did not mention the succession to the recreated dukedom of Edinburgh after Prince Edward's death, which implies Prince Philip either never considered the possibility that King Charles would not create it with the standard remainder (in which case it is unclear what his opinion would have been if he had considered it) or else it was not important enough to him to ask his oldest son to promise it.

Can you provide examples of peerages for which the remainder was changed? I am aware of an example in which the same peerage was created twice for the same person to be able to add a different remainder (Duke of Fife) to ensure it could be passed on; however, I am not aware of any changes in an existing peerage. Thanks in advance!

The dukedom of Marlborough's remainder was altered by Act of Parliament in 1706 to include all of the duke's male and female issue in the line of succession.

And it would look very mean to pick on the Kents and Gloucesters. It looks as if royal dukedoms will not be hereditary going forward, tbough.

I hope so, for more than one reason, but I don't think there has been any suggestion up to now that the life peerage approach will be applied to future royal dukedoms.

It might very well be King William who takes the decision, depending on when (if ever) the next royal dukedom is gifted.

I am, however, a bit surprised that only the Gloucester and Kent titles are discussed and not the Sussex title that is also set to continue on as long as there are male-heirs.

Perhaps because it is not yet clear whether the Sussex title will ever pass to a non-royal heir, and/or because the current duke and duchess of Sussex seem highly likely to react poorly to any such moves.

But I agree with you. If something were to be done to guarantee the eventual return of the Gloucester and Kent dukedoms to the Crown, the same should be applied to the Sussex dukedom. It would only be fair, and the dukedom of Sussex does have historical worth of its own, even if it is not comparable to Gloucester and Kent.

 

[Toledo]

If the link below opens in default Spanish language, just mouse over the article, right click and select Translate:

This is how the titles of the Windsors are after the new changes: new princes and dukes
After the latest swings of royal titles that have affected Prince Edward, his wife and son, as well as the children of the Sussexes, so is the British royal family


Sophie of Wessex 'relieved' not to have to bow more to Meghan Markle
A friend of the new Duchess of Edinburgh has revealed, with his words, the cold relationship that exists between the two women


Prince Edward's excitement, overwhelmed as he calls his wife "Duchess" for the first time
The increase in Sophie's royal status alongside that of her husband is a touching tribute to the late queen's daughter-in-law, whom she adored

 

[Duke of Leaside]

Well, now the line of succession page reads "James, Earl of Wessex". That's better but I agree it should be just "Earl of Wessex". Before today it read "Viscount Severn", NOT "James, Viscount Severn" or "The Viscount Severn"

I guess the webmasters at BP are reading us here at The Royal Forums because now they've finally got it right!

The line of succession page now (correctly) reads "14. Earl of Wessex" right below his father "13. The Duke of Edinburgh"

 

[royal-blue]

What would happen if, in the future, James was married, meaning him and his wife were Earl and Countess of Wessex, and then Edward passed away? Obviously the Duke of Edinburgh title would revert to the Criwn, but would James and his wife still be Earl and Countess of Wessex?

 

[Alison H]

They'd be the Earl and Countess of Wessex and Forfar. It's only the Edinburgh title which isn't hereditary.

 

[Duke of Leaside]

They'd be the Earl and Countess of Wessex and Forfar. It's only the Edinburgh title which isn't hereditary.

Nitpick: They'd be The Earl and Countess of Wessex and Forfar.

 

[Denville]

What would happen if, in the future, James was married, meaning him and his wife were Earl and Countess of Wessex, and then Edward passed away? Obviously the Duke of Edinburgh title would revert to the Criwn, but would James and his wife still be Earl and Countess of Wessex?

James is not Earl of Wessex properly, he is just using the title, as a courtesy. if his fahter died, J would inherit the titles of Wessex and Forfar... and be the earl. the Dukedom of Ed would revert to the crown.

 

[MARG]

I have to admit to being thrilled to see Edward and Sophie where they were always meant to be as Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh. I can't understand all those postulating that Charles was going to ignore his parents' wishes and confer the title on Charlotte!

All things are being done in accordance with royal and family mores. Having observed the proprieties of official mourning, the idea was to observe a reasonable time to pass that enabled the entire family, to grieve in private and put their parents and grandparents' memories to rest.

If Charles had started changing things at the end official mourning it would have been unseemly. But by timing the Edinburgh title to Prince Edward's birthday it just seemed right and acceptable. The Sussex press release timing also backs up the theory that it was decided after the late Queen's funeral.

 

[Heavs]

I have to admit to being thrilled to see Edward and Sophie where they were always meant to be as Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh. I can't understand all those postulating that Charles was going to ignore his parents' wishes and confer the title on Charlotte!

All things are being done in accordance with royal and family mores. Having observed the proprieties of official mourning, the idea was to observe a reasonable time to pass that enabled the entire family, to grieve in private and put their parents and grandparents' memories to rest.

If Charles had started changing things at the end official mourning it would have been unseemly. But by timing the Edinburgh title to Prince Edward's birthday it just seemed right and acceptable. The Sussex press release timing also backs up the theory that it was decided after the late Queen's funeral.

I don't think anyone thought that he was going to confer it on Charlotte at any point in the near future, just that there was media discussion that he wanted to be available to the family in the future -which it now is due to it becoming a Life Peerage. Which was something that Charles was reported as also mulling over.

Even before HM's death Camilla Tominey points out that in 2021 Edward referred to it as a "pipe dream" to her, suggesting that he didn't necessarily think it was definitely going to happen. It probably was all sorted a while ago, with his birthday picked as a suitable post mourning, pre coronation date but I don't think the speculation that it might not happen at all was unwarranted after the briefings pretty much all RRs reported since Philip's death, including those who have had good sources before and aren't from tabloids.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I wonder if Edward will now take his seat in the House of Lords. ALL life peers are entitled to do so so there is nothing stopping him from doing so (remember both his brother and father took their seats there).

 

[Duke of Leaside]

Hopefully the Letters Patent for this new creation of the Duke of Edinburgh title will pass the Great Seal of the Realm and be gazetted soon! (It would be nice if it takes less than the five and half months that the LP for The Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester took to be gazetted.)

And the (direction to be passed for the) Letters Patent have been gazetted!

Crown Office
HIS MAJESTY THE KING has been pleased to direct Letters Patent to be passed under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, granting unto His Majesty’s Brother, His Royal Highness Prince Edward Antony Richard Louis, Earl of Wessex and Forfar, K.G., G.C.V.O., for life the dignity of Duke of Edinburgh.


https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/4306002

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I wonder if Edward will now take his seat in the House of Lords. ALL life peers are entitled to do so so there is nothing stopping him from doing so (remember both his brother and father took their seats there).

Only life peerages conferred under the Life Peerages Act 1958 entitle the peer to take a seat in the House of Lords.


https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/6-7/21

Life Peerages Act 1958
1958 CHAPTER 21 6 and 7 Eliz 2

An Act to make provision for the creation of life peerages carrying the right to sit and vote in the House of Lords.

[30th April 1958]

1 Power to create life peerages carrying right to sit in the House of Lords.

(1) F1... Her Majesty shall have power by letters patent to confer on any person a peerage for life having the incidents specified in subsection (2) of this section.

(2) A peerage conferred under this section shall, during the life of the person on whom it is conferred, entitle him—

(a) to rank as a baron under such style as may be appointed by the letters patent; and

(b) subject to subsection (4) of this section, to receive writs of summons to attend the House of Lords and sit and vote therein accordingly,

and shall expire on his death.​

(3) A life peerage may be conferred under this section on a woman.

(4) Nothing in this section shall enable any person to receive a writ of summons to attend the House of Lords, or to sit and vote in that House, at any time when disqualified therefor by law.​

Note that, as section (4) recognizes, some life peers created under the Life Peerages Act 1958 are barred by other statutes from taking a seat in the House of Lords. Those who have certain classes of criminal convictions, for example, are not entitled to take a seat.

Incidentally, according to subsection (2)(b), any peerage conferred under the Life Peerages Act entitles the holder to rank as a baron. I am not sure if this means that only baronies may be conferred under the Life Peerages Act 1958, or if any degree of peerage (duke, etc.) may theoretically be conferred under the Life Peerages Act, but the peer would only have the rank of a baron.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I can't understand all those postulating that Charles was going to ignore his parents' wishes and confer the title on Charlotte!

First, it was not merely a matter of his parents' wishes, but Prince Charles' own agreed promise:

The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales have also agreed that The Prince Edward should be given the Dukedom of Edinburgh in due course, when the present title now held by Prince Philip eventually reverts to the Crown.

https://web.archive.org/web/2014020...ews/title_of_hrh_the_prince_edward/40309.html​

Second, it was Charles himself who stated in effect that he might ignore the agreement with his parents. Beginning in July 2021, his spokespersons repeated that "no final decisions" had been taken regarding the dukedom of Edinburgh.

https://people.com/royals/prince-charles-prince-edward-duke-of-edinburgh-title/

The speculation about saving the dukedom of Edinburgh for Princess Charlotte was encouraged by Buckingham Palace itself. The palace commented on that story by saying that "no decisions had been made".

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...g-duchess-edinburgh-title-princess-charlotte/

 

[Claire]

First, it was not merely a matter of his parents' wishes, but Prince Charles' own agreed promise:

The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales have also agreed that The Prince Edward should be given the Dukedom of Edinburgh in due course, when the present title now held by Prince Philip eventually reverts to the Crown.

https://web.archive.org/web/2014020...ews/title_of_hrh_the_prince_edward/40309.html​

Second, it was Charles himself who stated in effect that he might ignore the agreement with his parents. Beginning in July 2021, his spokespersons repeated that "no final decisions" had been taken regarding the dukedom of Edinburgh.

https://people.com/royals/prince-charles-prince-edward-duke-of-edinburgh-title/

The speculation about saving the dukedom of Edinburgh for Princess Charlotte was encouraged by Buckingham Palace itself. The palace commented on that story by saying that "no decisions had been made".

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...g-duchess-edinburgh-title-princess-charlotte/

I believe the decision to make Edward Duke was only made within the last 3 week, And yes part of it was the politics in Scotland - but I think it was mostly Charles declining popularity.

It was noted by many of the journalists that covered the story that the title might be recreated for Louis or Charlotte in the future and yes that was its intended future. so if Edward lives into his 80's - Charlotte and Louis can possibly get it in their late 20's.

It is my opinion that it had became an issue of annoyance to the Wessex's that Charles would not issue a statement that it was not going to confered on Edward. I believe he told the DOE to formally request Charles as patron, the palace press secretary asked journalist to stop including the possibility of the title in news reports and articles. I believe Edward even asked friends to move on from the title speculation.

 

[Denville]

Evidence for any of this?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

And the (direction to be passed for the) Letters Patent have been gazetted!

Crown Office
HIS MAJESTY THE KING has been pleased to direct Letters Patent to be passed under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, granting unto His Majesty’s Brother, His Royal Highness Prince Edward Antony Richard Louis, Earl of Wessex and Forfar, K.G., G.C.V.O., for life the dignity of Duke of Edinburgh.


https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/4306002

Thanks! I wonder why, unlike the gazette announcements of the royal peerages created by Queen Elizabeth II, this one does not mention the date of the letters patent.

It was noted by many of the journalists that covered the story that the title might be recreated for Louis or Charlotte in the future and yes that was its intended future. so if Edward lives into his 80's - Charlotte and Louis can possibly get it in their late 20's.

It was never reported by journalists, to the best of my knowledge, that the King definitively intended to recreate the dukedom for Charlotte or Louis - only that he examined those options.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Evidence for any of this?

None

Evidence the other way - the visit to Edinburgh on Edward's birthday - these things aren't arranged in a couple of weeks but take months of pre-planning.

The information I have, from sources, is that it was known at least last Christmas when it would be announced i.e. six months after the late Queen's death (end of 'half-mourning in the old days) and as Edward's birthday was two days later it was decided that Edward's birthday was the appropriate date.

The media makes up all sorts of stories and then has to 'take the credit' when they happen but the reality is the media LIES all the time about the royals e.g. the 'smaller royal family'. So far there has been NO cut-back in the number of working royals and an increase in the number of those entitled to HRH since Charles became King - hardly 'a smaller royal family'.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Since you accuse Buckingham Palace (which was still stating on the record earlier this year that no final decision had been taken) and numerous journalists (reports consistently supported Buckingham Palace's claim that nothing was final at that point) of lying, could you please cite those sources for your "at least since last Christmas" date?

[...] the media LIES all the time about the royals e.g. the 'smaller royal family'. So far there has been NO cut-back in the number of working royals and an increase in the number of those entitled to HRH since Charles became King - hardly 'a smaller royal family'.

Could you please post (in the appropriate thread) an example of a proven lie in a media report about the "smaller royal family" concept, as opposed to a difference of opinion or speculation? I realize that developments so far are not consistent with what you would expect from a "smaller royal family", but others would see it differently.

 

[Claire]

Weird question - would there be any reason why the palace would tell charities to use HRH The Prince Edward on plagues instead of HRH The Duke of Edinburgh?
I was asked this question after a journo noted that Edward opened Viva Theatre - on the 12th April 2023 with this on plague. When the journo pointed out it was incorrect - the organizers told them no that is precisely what BP had told them to do. I originally through that the plague might have been organized before he was made DOE - btu that wasn't the case either. It is very curious.

 

[wbenson]

That's bizarre, because the plaque at Harry Specters the very same day said "HRH the Duke of Edinburgh."

 

[Granada]

Claire, thanks for that tidbit. I find it curious to, a little unsettling, merely as if Prince Edward is a "place holder" to the Title and not fully invested.

It's not as if the Duke of Edinburgh never had other Men hold the Title either. Queen Victoria's second son Alfred was made Duke of Edinburgh in 1866.
He was born in 1844 and died in 1900. His only son and heir, Prince Alfred died under mysterious circumstances during festivities celebrating his Parents 25th Wedding Anniversary, it is thought he shot himself and later succumbed to the injury.

Yes, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh was absolutely iconic, really one of a kind. But why not recognize "Prince Edward, Duke of Edinburgh" ?
It could have read HRH Prince Edward Duke of Edinburgh, if they want to differentiate.

I really like Edward and Sophie, they have certainly grown in my estimation, respect and genuine "likeability".

Oh, well.....hopefully is was a one off.....

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Claire, thanks for that tidbit. I find it curious to, a little unsettling, merely as if Prince Edward is a "place holder" to the Title and not fully invested.

It's not as if the Duke of Edinburgh never had other Men hold the Title either. Queen Victoria's second son Alfred was made Duke of Edinburgh in 1866.
He was born in 1844 and died in 1900. His only son and heir, Prince Alfred died under mysterious circumstances during festivities celebrating his Parents 25th Wedding Anniversary, it is thought he shot himself and later succumbed to the injury.

Yes, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh was absolutely iconic, really one of a kind. But why not recognize "Prince Edward, Duke of Edinburgh" ?
It could have read HRH Prince Edward Duke of Edinburgh, if they want to differentiate.

I really like Edward and Sophie, they have certainly grown in my estimation, respect and genuine "likeability".

Oh, well.....hopefully is was a one off.....

It is just custom. Like Prince William will unveil a plaque or a stone with HRH The Prince of Wales like all his predecessors before him. It has nothing to do with likeability or something. Edward simply IS HRH The Duke of Edinburgh. The two plaques are not 100% the same as Prince Philip would have been HRH The Duke of Edinburgh KG, KT, OM, GBE, AC, QSO, PC.

 

[Granada]

Duc_et_Pair. If custom, then shouldn't it have read HRH The Duke of Edinburgh ?

As wbenson points out, at another unveiling at Harry Specters, it was HRH The Duke of Edinburgh.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Duc_et_Pair. If custom, then shouldn't it have read HRH The Duke of Edinburgh ?

As wbenson points out, at another unveiling at Harry Specters, it was HRH The Duke of Edinburgh.

But it does read HRH The Duke of Edinburgh, or am I reading/discussing the wrong plaque ?

 

[Granada]

Wrong plaque, It was the one referenced in Claire's comment a few back.

 

[Claire]

Guess it must be a miscommunication or some weird thing.
Thank you
Same journo asked why the DOE is allowed to to be used in Britain- unlike other Scottish titles which are only used in Scotland. I guess she was asking if Edward is now Prince Edward in Britain and DOE in Scotland. Much like it was with Earl of Wessex in Britain and Earl of Forther in Scotland - but this makes no sense either.

 

[tommy100]

Weird question - would there be any reason why the palace would tell charities to use HRH The Prince Edward on plagues instead of HRH The Duke of Edinburgh?
I was asked this question after a journo noted that Edward opened Viva Theatre - on the 12th April 2023 with this on plague. When the journo pointed out it was incorrect - the organizers told them no that is precisely what BP had told them to do. I originally through that the plague might have been organized before he was made DOE - btu that wasn't the case either. It is very curious.

When did the theatre ask BP about the plaque? I mean Edward was granted the title on his birthday - Fri 10th March, the visit took place a month later 12th April. It is far more likely IMO that the plaque was thought about a month before the visit. I find it hard to believe a well planned royal visit would only ask what to put on the plaque a month before the visit took place (factor in time to get an answer, get plaque made up in time, check it etc) unless the theatre has its own people to make the plaque on demand.

BP may have been trying to be helpful by suggesting not using a title they knew would make the plaque look out of date at the time of unveiling. Unless there is clear proof that BP make the plaque suggestion after the 10th March I don't see the issue at all.

Here is an example of the usual protocol around a royal visit including approval of any plaque to be unveiled

https://www.hants.gov.uk/aboutthecouncil/lieutenancy/royalvisits/hosting

Once the date of the visit has been confirmed, you should submit a detailed draft programme to the Lieutenancy Office. This programme should be a step-by-step guide to what HRH will be seeing, doing and who they will be meeting during the visit, and ideally timings broken up into 5 or 10 minute slots. An example programme can be provided to assist you...

The draft wording for a plaque should be sent to the Lieutenancy Office for approval by the Royal Household. The wording must be approved prior to commissioning.


To be frank, asking BP a month before the visit is last minute.