Royal style & gossip: strawberries, serves and sartorial splendour - anyone for tennis?

[QueenOfTheAndals]

Previous thread

Okay, quick google:

The Queen issued a Letters Patent to change William's title following his wedding, granting him "and the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten the dignities of Baron Carrickfergus, Earl of Strathearn, and Duke of Cambridge

So yes, it is now a hereditary title and either George gets them all or they get passed around. But only the boys. Fuckers.

It's all very well Charlotte being in the line of succession, but I honestly don't understand this massive issue with making it so that girls can inherit titles. I'm not wild about the fact that it's not being acted retrospectively (ie to make Anne higher up) but I do see the point (arguably, it could then be suggested the queen is not the legitimate queen currently, for example), but why if we can have a queen if a daughter happens to be born first can we not have a duchess or whatever too. Argh....!!!!! And while I find Andrew's grubbing for his daughters' unpleasant, I do wonder if this annoys him too.

Having said that, assuming Beatrice has a boy before Andrew dies, that child would be the heir to the York dukedom one assumes? Or, for that matter, Eugenie's boy would be heir UNTIL Beatrice had one who would usurp his cousin?

Sorry, one last thing - this on Duke of York, "The Duke of York title has a unique history in that only in its first creation did the title pass directly from father to son (this happened twice) – every other Duke of York has either inherited the throne (thereby absorbing the Duke of York title into the other titles of the crown) or passed away without any male heirs to take the title on."

Suggests that once William becomes King, Dukedom of Cambridge would disappear.

The Title Duke of York would not pass to Bea/Eug son without letters parent but if Andy remarried and had a son he would become Duke of York on his fathers death.

But the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester got their titles from their fathers originally didn't they?

Yes, but their fathers got those titles by being created royal dukes by their father George V, in much the same way that Andrew was made Duke of York by the Queen.

The Letters Patent making him Duke of York make no provision for the title to pass through women, but to “heirs male of his body.”

There's no way Meghan will ever present trophies at Wimbledon whoever wins. It doesn't work like that. The Duke of Kent presents them. When he retires Kate will present them as she is earmarked to take over from him.

Seneca - I'm trying not to grind my teeth at the archaic misogyny of this stuff. But it's hard.

I agree Bling. And that the children of male children of the monarch are HRH, but not the children of female children of the monarch. This situation required George VI to issue special LPs so that Charles and Anne would be Prince and Princess at birth.

That's right re DoY @BlingLoving, the last time it was passed on was, I think, during the Wars of the Roses! I think the current royal dukedoms all date from George VI's generation. None of Queen Victoria's sons' dukedoms continued into the present day, as far as I know, though there might be an earldom that was inherited by a daughter?

It's fun reading about the non-royal dukedoms though, as they can be inherited by the closest male relative, who could be anyone. The current Duke of Atholl was, I think, an accountant in South Africa when a distant cousin died, and now he's a duke with his own private army. Downton's got nothing on that story!

@queen - I just went down a wiki hole. Apparently they have the titles but no cash, and based on where they live and career, clearly that's still the case. The previous duke gave away all the land etc just before he died to prevent the new duke, who died a few years ago, getting it. How utterly bizarre.

Makes you wonder what will happen once all the royal dukedoms have been used - I assume make some more? Is that even possible?

Over to my more learned friends

It is the person who holds the title, not the title itself, which is "Royal". So once the title has passed beyond the grandson of a monarch it ceases to be "Royal".

Nothing constructive to add. But this stuff about dukedoms/royal dukedoms/titles/how they descend/where they land is great.

Some of it I am across, but much I am not.

Keep it coming, those who know - it's fascinating.

My neighbour is the heir to a very ancient title currently held by his great uncle. He’s a surveyor in an estate agency. We all live cheek by jowl in terraced houses, some of it housing trust! His wife grew up locally and is absolutely dreading taking over the castle and farms plural that go with the title. It’s not like a lottery win.

It’s not just any random male relative, the male relative still has to be the direct descendant in the male line (‘heirs male of his body’) from whoever the title was granted to. So titles do die out.... but the longer they have been around the more chance there is that there is some distant cousin out there with a claim. Must be incredibly frustrating if you’re a daughter, especially if there is property tied to the title....

So what would happen if George or Louis eventually decided to marry their boyfriends-or Charlotte her girlfriend? Would their spouses have any titles at all?

If letters patent were issued to give them a title what possible titles might they get?

The same sex marriage question is an interesting one. I think that new Letters Patent might be needed to address that.

I would love one of the Cambridge children to have a same sex marriage.
I reckon George would be King with a Prince Consort;
Charlotte would be The Princess Royal with a Countess wife (akin to the Earldom normally handed out)
Prince Louis; Duke of X would probably also be married to an Earl.

Then Charlotte’s children would be Lords and Ladies and the Princes would also have princes/ esses

George entering a same sex marriage could be very problematic unless the Church of England changes its teaching.

What would be the view of a royal heir born via a surrogate mother?

I think I can hear Stanley Baldwin turning in his grave!

There was a surrogate baby born to the grandchild of that Duke that has the zoo.... Oh what's his name.... The horrible one who kept "wifelets".

But it wasn't the heir, it was the spare. The mother discovered during her first pregnancy that it could literally kill her at any time, so was told no more pregnancies so they went to the US for a surrogate as the laws are strict there. In other words, the surrogate can't claim the child like in the UK.

Meanwhile, they are estranged from the Duke and (original) Duchess cos the son has the audacity to marry a black woman, even though they had literally grown up together. It was all utterly dreadful.

That makes no sense - the grandchild was born by surrogate I meant!