This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Duke of Edinburgh article. This is
not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the
Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the
project page, where you can
join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty articles
There's nothing in the cited source (royal.uk) that says that the title will not be inherited by Edward's heirs, so I have deleted that line from the article.
Rojomoke (
talk)
10:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)reply
There have been several life dukedoms in the past. In Scotland it was once usual, when a peeress in her own right married someone of lower rank, to give him a title matching hers for life. At least one royal mistress was made a duchess for life. —
Tamfang (
talk)
06:16, 11 March 2023 (UTC)reply
royal.uk doesn't directly say it is a life peerage, and under current rules it can not be done without a act of parliament and still gazette is not issued.
Chamika1990 (
talk)
12:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)reply
It's true that a peerage, once created, cannot be modified but by act of Parliament; but in creating it the Crown can constrain or expand the succession
nearly whatever way it likes, by replacing the usual formula "the heirs of his body lawfully begotten" in the document creating the title. —
Tamfang (
talk)
06:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm sure all our questions will be answered in time. But regarding the legality, if the letters patent omit the phrase "and the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten" then it simply won't be inherited? The creation of the Earl of Burma shows that the King can deviate from the usual formula without an Act of Parliament. --
Mgp28 (
talk)
13:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)reply
In 1726 George I has not used the phrase "heirs male of his body lawfully betton" to create his grandson Frederick, Duke of Edinburgh. But we can see from other sources that later that Frederick's son inherited the title as of default remainder. The King can deviate remainder at the time of creation. But can not be changed once created.
Chamika1990 (
talk)
02:32, 12 March 2023 (UTC)reply
I agree with your view on this. The Sovereign is open to all sorts of variations in the way a peerage title may be inherited, either by the usual way you mention, or indeed opening the succession to females (such was the case with the Earldom of Mountbatten of Burma). Even more variations can be seen in the creation of the Dukedom of Marlborough, which makes this title unlikely to become extinct. Either way, it does not require an Act of Parliament to vary the way a peerage may be inherited or not.
Ds1994 (
talk)
13:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Life Peerages existed even before 1958, although they were usually granted to females, and as others have said, the key is what the remainder of the peerage is. The last time that this was done was in the mid-19th century to create Baron Wensleydale, although a dispute over his right to sit in the Lords meant that an entirely notional hereditary peerage was then conferred (he had no sons to inherit in any case). I see no reason that a creation for his lifetime only would be irregular, as the effect of the 1958 Act was NOT to allow for Life Peerages, but to allow life peers created under that Act to sit in the Lords (overturning the Wensleydale precedent). As such, it appears that this will be a life peerage that does NOT carry a right to sit in the Lords.
213.105.55.131 (
talk)
13:34, 10 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Also agreed. I think I can also recall some instances in the later medieval period where peerages were awarded for life only. I can't recall the exact titles involved but the principle remains the same. So it seems that creating life peerages of any of the five ranks of nobility are entirely possible. On a more practical level it does solve the problem of any proliferation of royal dukedoms in the second generation, and subsequent non royal dukedoms in future generations.
Ds1994 (
talk)
13:42, 10 March 2023 (UTC)reply
I think, in 1937 former King Edward VIII created Duke of Windsor in same manner even without subsidiary titles. There was no letters patent issued in normal manner with remainder. As he has no children it was not a case
Chamika1990 (
talk)
03:22, 11 March 2023 (UTC)reply
"Another thing had also happened in the intervening period: the rise of the Scottish National Party. With the Union hanging in the balance, was it really the right decision to give the Edinburgh dukedom to someone descending fast down the royal ranking? Why not confer the title on the Princess Royal, a trusted royal trouper whose love of Scotland is well known?"
"It should not go unnoticed that this announcement came just weeks after Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s First Minister, announced her resignation. With the prospect of Scottish independence now looking less likely, there is far less risk in making the trusty Wessexes the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh for now, if not forever."
Thanks, in which case, what is being said is subtly different, I believe, so alternatively: According to Camilla Tominey of The Daily Telegraph, there had been concerns regarding the effect that ”giv(ing) the Edinburgh dukedom to someone descending fast down the royal ranking” would have on the Scottish independence debate. She proposes that “the prospect of Scottish independence now looking less likely” in the light of Nicola Sturgeon’s forthcoming resignation made the conferral less of a risk. ?
Mutt Lunker (
talk)
19:22, 20 March 2023 (UTC)reply
No you got that wrong. Charles inherited it when Philip died and then the title merged in the crown on Charles' accession allowing him to bestow it as a new creation on Edward.
DeCausa (
talk)
19:54, 5 August 2023 (UTC)reply