This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of dukes in the peerages of Britain and Ireland article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a list of dukedoms/duchies of the UK, and not a list of Dukes/dukedom/duchies in general, so it should be moved to some other title. 132.205.45.148 21:07, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"The Peerages" seems a bit contrived though it may be a British idiom I'm unfamiliar with. What about List of Dukes in the United Kingdom. If the Irish titles are still applicable in Ireland then List of Dukes in the UK and Ireland. Alternatively: List of British Dukes. Ben Arnold 05:05, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"List of British Dukes" suggests to me "List of Dukes in the Peerage of Great Britain", as I might say that the Duke of Northumberland is a "British Duke" in the same way that the Duke of Norfolk is an "English Duke" and the Duke of Montrose is a "Scottish Duke". At any rate, I see no point in pre-emptively disambiguating this page when we have no other lists of Dukes. Proteus (Talk) 08:15, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. No consensus for move. violet/riga (t) 21:13, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus; however, I'll be WP:BOLD and move it to List of dukes in the peerages of the British Isles instead. — Nightst a llion (?) Seen this already? 10:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
List of Dukes → List of Dukes of the United Kingdom and Ireland : This is not a list of dukes in general, but of dukes of the peerages of the United Kingdom and Ireland. As it stands, the title is inaccurate and misleading : Fishhead64 18:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Might I suggest List of dukes in the peerages of Great Britain and Ireland as a compromise? This makes the appellation purely geographical, referring to the islands inhabited by these peerages rather than the shifting political entities, and avoiding what I gather is the somewhat controversial designation of Ireland as part of the British Isles. Fishhead64 00:07, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Are there still Irish dukes, recognised as such in Ireland? If not why Dukes of the UK and Ireland why not just "dukes of the UK"? When Dukes were still being created Ireland was part of the UK, or should the title be list of "dukes of Great Britain and Ireland" ? -- Philip Baird Shearer 09:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
But it cuts both ways, if we tag on "and Ireland", it could be read that it implies Betty still has the power to grant Irish peerages. Also as it is the UK expands to "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" The full title is "List of dukes of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Ireland". As for other titles you do not have to resubmit the request just add Proposals. (See this recent example)-- Philip Baird Shearer 18:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
The senior title holders aren't Dukes of the United Kingdom or of Ireland, though, they're Dukes of England, Dukes of Scotland and Dukes of Great Britain. Dukes of the United Kingdom are purely those created after 1801 excluding the Duke of Abercorn. List of British Dukes is also out, because in a Peerage sense it means the same as "List of Dukes of Great Britain". If you really can't cope with the current title, then the only correct options I can think of would be the rather unwieldy List of Dukes in the Peerages of the British Isles or splitting it into List of Dukes of England, List of Dukes of Scotland, etc. Proteus (Talk) 14:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Proteus about the proposed move location being misleading - "Dukes of the United Kingdom and Ireland" would imply the Peerages of the UK and Ireland. I disagree with Proteus that List of British Dukes would mean "List of Dukes of Great Britain." At the very least, we could just note at the top that we are referring to all the Dukes in the various peerages of the British Isles, and not just the Dukes of the Peerage of Great Britain, and I think that would settle the matter. I would add that this list is not exactly a list of Dukes. It is a list of currently extant dukedoms. To have a list of dukes would require linking all the individual dukes. I may do that, though - I think most of them have at least stubs. john k 21:24, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
You know, I'm just going to end up bloody well moving the thing myself because this hair-splitting is driving me nuts - LOL! Fishhead64 05:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Given the discussion here and the general support for moving the article to a more descriptive and accurate title, would anyone object if I moved the article to List of dukes in the peerages of the British Isles with a redirect from List of dukes? I'm going to propose this for the other peerage pages, as well. Fishhead64 20:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Much simpler to divide Peers into England, Scotland, Great Britain, Ireland, and the United Kingdom, as the header does. This is surely the more immediately relevant information for most readers; anyone inviting the Dukes of Wellington and Abercorn to a formal dinner should be consulting other sources anyway. Septentrionalis 22:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
But part of the purpose of this article is to list peers in order of precedence. It's not such a big deal with Dukes, but for other levels of the peerage it's much harder to reconstruct the order of precedence from a separated list of Irish and UK peers than it is to simply footnote all the Irish ones. john k 00:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
(left) That's fine; I'll look at Cokayne when I have the chance.
These are, as stated, exactly the same order, in the sense that no possible combination of facts can give different precedence. Septentrionalis 05:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
There should be one for France. What about peerages for Orange and Hanover; etc? IP Address 23:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Duke should be capitalised in the title of this article Grunners 15:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
The Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay is omitted from the list, yet other Royal Dukes are listed. Why? 195.92.40.49 19:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I see that Cornwall was added in July 2009. If it is going to stay, shouldn't Prince William be added under 'eldest sons of Dukes'? He is the Duke of Cornwall's eldest son, although that title does not pass from father to son. Alekksandr ( talk) 22:03, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure the Duke of Richmond title is in the English peerage, Duke of Lennox in the Scottish and Duke of Gordon in the British. Shouldn't these be marked separately, even if they are and always have been all held by the same person? Andrei Iosifovich ( talk) 01:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I eliminated the Dukedom of Ulster from the Irish peerage. I can't find any mention of this dukedom elsewhere, so I assume that it was the work of vandals, Pacomartin ( talk) 11:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I checked the history. This dukedome was added on 15 January 2009, and Billy McMillen was an IRA activist that died in the 1970's. There is no name on the edit, but maybe someone can track the individual. Pacomartin ( talk) 11:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC) Calypso1020 ( talk) 15:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
my comment does not contain an academic reference.
I rather need an advice.Can some of you give names of gentelmen clubs or countryside places or leisure points where i could possibly meet members of british nobilty?
I belong to the french one,coming from an old french-canadian family and would like to find a beloved husband among british nobiilty.
May be there is even a specific introduction services?-I do not know their names as I live in France.
Thank you for your advice to globeonnet@live.com
Calypso1020 ( talk) 15:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I have found no proof of the existence of the Duke of Seychelles, either in Debrett's Peerage or anywhere else in Wikipedia. Please prove or remove. Jeremicus rex ( talk) 17:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
The Duke of Cambridge appears under "Dukes in the Peerage of England" and "Dukes in the Peerage of the United Kingdom." Presumably it should be listed under just one of these; which one? Tinmanic ( talk) 21:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia policy ( WP:LISTPEOPLE) states that individuals should only be included on lists if "the person meets the Wikipedia notability requirement". Since there is nothing notable whatsoever about being the younger son of a Duke (notability, in Wikipedia's terms, not being inherited), can anyone give a good reason why that section of the list should not be deleted entirely? This is an encyclopaedia, not Burke's Peerage. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 01:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Please do not restore this list to the article until it is properly sourced, and consensus is reached that it should be. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 15:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
The article says "In the peerage of England, the title of Duke was created 74 times (using 40 different titles: the rest were recreations). Twice a woman was created a Duchess in her own right (but only for life). Out of the 74 times, 37 titles are now extinct (including the two women's), 16 titles were forfeit or surrendered, 10 were merged with the crown, and 10 are extant..." That adds up to only 73. Richard75 ( talk) 11:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
I suggest that the page should in some way record that: - 1. The Duke of Richmond, Lennox, and Gordon holds three dukedoms in three peerages. 2. The Duke of Argyll holds two dukedoms in two peerages. I appreciate that each of them is shown in the position from which he derives his precedence. Could they appear in the other positions in italics? Alekksandr ( talk) 21:36, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
At present, each list can only be viewed in order of creation. I suggest that it would be useful if the whole list were made sortable - compare List of dukedoms in the peerages of Britain and Ireland. Its default position would be according to precedence, but it could also be viewed alphbetically (Abercorn to York), by date of creation (1337 to 2011) or according to the five peerages (England, Scotland, GB, Ireland and the UK). The list would look like this: -
Comments? Alekksandr ( talk) 17:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you to all who have worked on these tables. Can anyone tell me, what do the italics represent in the tables? There should be some kind of key as to why Duke of Lennox etc are italicized and skipped in the order. @ Alekksandr: perhaps you know? —Мандичка YO 😜 15:29, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for being so cool. I see now that it was mentioned in the column at the right! But for some reason when I saw italics it seemed to signal "invalid" in some way and I was thinking it meant extinct, but of course it wasn't. What do you think about this to symbolize multiple dukedoms?
Number | Title | Date of creation | Arms | Current holder | Age | Peerage | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | The Duke of Cornwall | (1337) [Notes 1] | HRH The Prince Charles, Prince of Wales (23rd person to hold the title) | 14 November 1948 | England | Also Duke of Rothesay in the Peerage of Scotland (1398) – see below | |
2. | The Duke of Norfolk | (1483) | Edward Fitzalan-Howard, 18th Duke of Norfolk | 2 December 1956 | England | ||
3. | The Duke of Somerset | (1547) | John Seymour, 19th Duke of Somerset | 30 December 1952 | England | ||
4. | The Duke of Richmond, Lennox, and Gordon | (1675) | Charles Gordon-Lennox, 10th Duke of Richmond | 19 September 1929 | England | Also Duke of Lennox in the Peerage of Scotland (1675) – see below | |
5. | The Duke of Grafton | (1675) | Henry FitzRoy, 12th Duke of Grafton | 6 April 1978 | England | ||
6. | The Duke of Beaufort | (1682) | David Somerset, 11th Duke of Beaufort | 23 February 1928 | England | ||
7. | The Duke of St Albans | (1684) | Murray Beauclerk, 14th Duke of St Albans | 19 January 1939 | England | ||
8. | The Duke of Bedford | (1694) | Andrew Russell, 15th Duke of Bedford | 30 March 1962 | England | ||
9. | The Duke of Devonshire | (1694) | Peregrine Cavendish, 12th Duke of Devonshire | 27 April 1944 | England | ||
10. | The Duke of Marlborough | (1702) | Jamie Spencer-Churchill, 12th Duke of Marlborough | 24 November 1955 | England | ||
11. | The Duke of Rutland | (1703) | David Manners, 11th Duke of Rutland | 8 May 1959 | England | ||
Secondary dukedom | The Duke of Rothesay | (1398) [Notes 1] | HRH The Prince Charles, Prince of Wales (23rd person to hold the title.) | 14 November 1948 | Scotland | Also Duke of Cornwall in the Peerage of England (1337) – see above. | |
12. | The Duke of Hamilton | (1643) | Alexander Douglas-Hamilton, 16th Duke of Hamilton | 31 March 1978 | Scotland | Also Duke of Brandon in the Peerage of Great Britain (1711) – see below | |
13. | The Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry | (1663) and (1684) | Richard Scott, 10th Duke of Buccleuch | 14 February 1954 | Scotland | ||
Secondary dukedom | The Duke of Lennox | (1675) | Charles Gordon-Lennox, 10th Duke of Lennox | 19 September 1929 | Scotland | Also Duke of Richmond in the Peerage of England (1675) – see above. |
So what would you think about this? The table is awesome and I want to use it on the List of Earls page too.
—Мандичка
YO 😜 20:03, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
In heir apparents section Sussex is listed as Royal dukedoms, but Gluocester and Kent is not.
All three are currently royal Dukedoms and all three heirs are not Princes. Archie is a possible future Prince but still not.
Chamika1990 (
talk) 15:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
“The Earl of Wilton is the heir presumptive to his Marquessate of Westminster.“
What does that even mean??
And is the Marquessate not subsumed into the Dukedom? Or are the succession rules a little different? There is, anyway, nothing about this on the Earl of Wilton’s page. Please clarify. 2A00:23C7:E284:CF00:59B8:7E4B:2A19:70BF ( talk) 23:03, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
Should the title of Duke of Lancaster not be part of the list? I understand that it is held by the monarch but it is a dukedom nonetheless. Vesuvio14 ( talk) 19:47, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=Notes>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=Notes}}
template (see the
help page).
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of dukes in the peerages of Britain and Ireland article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is a list of dukedoms/duchies of the UK, and not a list of Dukes/dukedom/duchies in general, so it should be moved to some other title. 132.205.45.148 21:07, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"The Peerages" seems a bit contrived though it may be a British idiom I'm unfamiliar with. What about List of Dukes in the United Kingdom. If the Irish titles are still applicable in Ireland then List of Dukes in the UK and Ireland. Alternatively: List of British Dukes. Ben Arnold 05:05, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"List of British Dukes" suggests to me "List of Dukes in the Peerage of Great Britain", as I might say that the Duke of Northumberland is a "British Duke" in the same way that the Duke of Norfolk is an "English Duke" and the Duke of Montrose is a "Scottish Duke". At any rate, I see no point in pre-emptively disambiguating this page when we have no other lists of Dukes. Proteus (Talk) 08:15, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. No consensus for move. violet/riga (t) 21:13, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus; however, I'll be WP:BOLD and move it to List of dukes in the peerages of the British Isles instead. — Nightst a llion (?) Seen this already? 10:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
List of Dukes → List of Dukes of the United Kingdom and Ireland : This is not a list of dukes in general, but of dukes of the peerages of the United Kingdom and Ireland. As it stands, the title is inaccurate and misleading : Fishhead64 18:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Might I suggest List of dukes in the peerages of Great Britain and Ireland as a compromise? This makes the appellation purely geographical, referring to the islands inhabited by these peerages rather than the shifting political entities, and avoiding what I gather is the somewhat controversial designation of Ireland as part of the British Isles. Fishhead64 00:07, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Are there still Irish dukes, recognised as such in Ireland? If not why Dukes of the UK and Ireland why not just "dukes of the UK"? When Dukes were still being created Ireland was part of the UK, or should the title be list of "dukes of Great Britain and Ireland" ? -- Philip Baird Shearer 09:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
But it cuts both ways, if we tag on "and Ireland", it could be read that it implies Betty still has the power to grant Irish peerages. Also as it is the UK expands to "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" The full title is "List of dukes of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Ireland". As for other titles you do not have to resubmit the request just add Proposals. (See this recent example)-- Philip Baird Shearer 18:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
The senior title holders aren't Dukes of the United Kingdom or of Ireland, though, they're Dukes of England, Dukes of Scotland and Dukes of Great Britain. Dukes of the United Kingdom are purely those created after 1801 excluding the Duke of Abercorn. List of British Dukes is also out, because in a Peerage sense it means the same as "List of Dukes of Great Britain". If you really can't cope with the current title, then the only correct options I can think of would be the rather unwieldy List of Dukes in the Peerages of the British Isles or splitting it into List of Dukes of England, List of Dukes of Scotland, etc. Proteus (Talk) 14:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Proteus about the proposed move location being misleading - "Dukes of the United Kingdom and Ireland" would imply the Peerages of the UK and Ireland. I disagree with Proteus that List of British Dukes would mean "List of Dukes of Great Britain." At the very least, we could just note at the top that we are referring to all the Dukes in the various peerages of the British Isles, and not just the Dukes of the Peerage of Great Britain, and I think that would settle the matter. I would add that this list is not exactly a list of Dukes. It is a list of currently extant dukedoms. To have a list of dukes would require linking all the individual dukes. I may do that, though - I think most of them have at least stubs. john k 21:24, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
You know, I'm just going to end up bloody well moving the thing myself because this hair-splitting is driving me nuts - LOL! Fishhead64 05:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Given the discussion here and the general support for moving the article to a more descriptive and accurate title, would anyone object if I moved the article to List of dukes in the peerages of the British Isles with a redirect from List of dukes? I'm going to propose this for the other peerage pages, as well. Fishhead64 20:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Much simpler to divide Peers into England, Scotland, Great Britain, Ireland, and the United Kingdom, as the header does. This is surely the more immediately relevant information for most readers; anyone inviting the Dukes of Wellington and Abercorn to a formal dinner should be consulting other sources anyway. Septentrionalis 22:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
But part of the purpose of this article is to list peers in order of precedence. It's not such a big deal with Dukes, but for other levels of the peerage it's much harder to reconstruct the order of precedence from a separated list of Irish and UK peers than it is to simply footnote all the Irish ones. john k 00:12, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
(left) That's fine; I'll look at Cokayne when I have the chance.
These are, as stated, exactly the same order, in the sense that no possible combination of facts can give different precedence. Septentrionalis 05:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
There should be one for France. What about peerages for Orange and Hanover; etc? IP Address 23:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Duke should be capitalised in the title of this article Grunners 15:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
The Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay is omitted from the list, yet other Royal Dukes are listed. Why? 195.92.40.49 19:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I see that Cornwall was added in July 2009. If it is going to stay, shouldn't Prince William be added under 'eldest sons of Dukes'? He is the Duke of Cornwall's eldest son, although that title does not pass from father to son. Alekksandr ( talk) 22:03, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure the Duke of Richmond title is in the English peerage, Duke of Lennox in the Scottish and Duke of Gordon in the British. Shouldn't these be marked separately, even if they are and always have been all held by the same person? Andrei Iosifovich ( talk) 01:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I eliminated the Dukedom of Ulster from the Irish peerage. I can't find any mention of this dukedom elsewhere, so I assume that it was the work of vandals, Pacomartin ( talk) 11:35, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I checked the history. This dukedome was added on 15 January 2009, and Billy McMillen was an IRA activist that died in the 1970's. There is no name on the edit, but maybe someone can track the individual. Pacomartin ( talk) 11:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC) Calypso1020 ( talk) 15:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
my comment does not contain an academic reference.
I rather need an advice.Can some of you give names of gentelmen clubs or countryside places or leisure points where i could possibly meet members of british nobilty?
I belong to the french one,coming from an old french-canadian family and would like to find a beloved husband among british nobiilty.
May be there is even a specific introduction services?-I do not know their names as I live in France.
Thank you for your advice to globeonnet@live.com
Calypso1020 ( talk) 15:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I have found no proof of the existence of the Duke of Seychelles, either in Debrett's Peerage or anywhere else in Wikipedia. Please prove or remove. Jeremicus rex ( talk) 17:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
The Duke of Cambridge appears under "Dukes in the Peerage of England" and "Dukes in the Peerage of the United Kingdom." Presumably it should be listed under just one of these; which one? Tinmanic ( talk) 21:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia policy ( WP:LISTPEOPLE) states that individuals should only be included on lists if "the person meets the Wikipedia notability requirement". Since there is nothing notable whatsoever about being the younger son of a Duke (notability, in Wikipedia's terms, not being inherited), can anyone give a good reason why that section of the list should not be deleted entirely? This is an encyclopaedia, not Burke's Peerage. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 01:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Please do not restore this list to the article until it is properly sourced, and consensus is reached that it should be. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 15:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
The article says "In the peerage of England, the title of Duke was created 74 times (using 40 different titles: the rest were recreations). Twice a woman was created a Duchess in her own right (but only for life). Out of the 74 times, 37 titles are now extinct (including the two women's), 16 titles were forfeit or surrendered, 10 were merged with the crown, and 10 are extant..." That adds up to only 73. Richard75 ( talk) 11:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
I suggest that the page should in some way record that: - 1. The Duke of Richmond, Lennox, and Gordon holds three dukedoms in three peerages. 2. The Duke of Argyll holds two dukedoms in two peerages. I appreciate that each of them is shown in the position from which he derives his precedence. Could they appear in the other positions in italics? Alekksandr ( talk) 21:36, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
At present, each list can only be viewed in order of creation. I suggest that it would be useful if the whole list were made sortable - compare List of dukedoms in the peerages of Britain and Ireland. Its default position would be according to precedence, but it could also be viewed alphbetically (Abercorn to York), by date of creation (1337 to 2011) or according to the five peerages (England, Scotland, GB, Ireland and the UK). The list would look like this: -
Comments? Alekksandr ( talk) 17:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Thank you to all who have worked on these tables. Can anyone tell me, what do the italics represent in the tables? There should be some kind of key as to why Duke of Lennox etc are italicized and skipped in the order. @ Alekksandr: perhaps you know? —Мандичка YO 😜 15:29, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for being so cool. I see now that it was mentioned in the column at the right! But for some reason when I saw italics it seemed to signal "invalid" in some way and I was thinking it meant extinct, but of course it wasn't. What do you think about this to symbolize multiple dukedoms?
Number | Title | Date of creation | Arms | Current holder | Age | Peerage | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | The Duke of Cornwall | (1337) [Notes 1] | HRH The Prince Charles, Prince of Wales (23rd person to hold the title) | 14 November 1948 | England | Also Duke of Rothesay in the Peerage of Scotland (1398) – see below | |
2. | The Duke of Norfolk | (1483) | Edward Fitzalan-Howard, 18th Duke of Norfolk | 2 December 1956 | England | ||
3. | The Duke of Somerset | (1547) | John Seymour, 19th Duke of Somerset | 30 December 1952 | England | ||
4. | The Duke of Richmond, Lennox, and Gordon | (1675) | Charles Gordon-Lennox, 10th Duke of Richmond | 19 September 1929 | England | Also Duke of Lennox in the Peerage of Scotland (1675) – see below | |
5. | The Duke of Grafton | (1675) | Henry FitzRoy, 12th Duke of Grafton | 6 April 1978 | England | ||
6. | The Duke of Beaufort | (1682) | David Somerset, 11th Duke of Beaufort | 23 February 1928 | England | ||
7. | The Duke of St Albans | (1684) | Murray Beauclerk, 14th Duke of St Albans | 19 January 1939 | England | ||
8. | The Duke of Bedford | (1694) | Andrew Russell, 15th Duke of Bedford | 30 March 1962 | England | ||
9. | The Duke of Devonshire | (1694) | Peregrine Cavendish, 12th Duke of Devonshire | 27 April 1944 | England | ||
10. | The Duke of Marlborough | (1702) | Jamie Spencer-Churchill, 12th Duke of Marlborough | 24 November 1955 | England | ||
11. | The Duke of Rutland | (1703) | David Manners, 11th Duke of Rutland | 8 May 1959 | England | ||
Secondary dukedom | The Duke of Rothesay | (1398) [Notes 1] | HRH The Prince Charles, Prince of Wales (23rd person to hold the title.) | 14 November 1948 | Scotland | Also Duke of Cornwall in the Peerage of England (1337) – see above. | |
12. | The Duke of Hamilton | (1643) | Alexander Douglas-Hamilton, 16th Duke of Hamilton | 31 March 1978 | Scotland | Also Duke of Brandon in the Peerage of Great Britain (1711) – see below | |
13. | The Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry | (1663) and (1684) | Richard Scott, 10th Duke of Buccleuch | 14 February 1954 | Scotland | ||
Secondary dukedom | The Duke of Lennox | (1675) | Charles Gordon-Lennox, 10th Duke of Lennox | 19 September 1929 | Scotland | Also Duke of Richmond in the Peerage of England (1675) – see above. |
So what would you think about this? The table is awesome and I want to use it on the List of Earls page too.
—Мандичка
YO 😜 20:03, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
In heir apparents section Sussex is listed as Royal dukedoms, but Gluocester and Kent is not.
All three are currently royal Dukedoms and all three heirs are not Princes. Archie is a possible future Prince but still not.
Chamika1990 (
talk) 15:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
“The Earl of Wilton is the heir presumptive to his Marquessate of Westminster.“
What does that even mean??
And is the Marquessate not subsumed into the Dukedom? Or are the succession rules a little different? There is, anyway, nothing about this on the Earl of Wilton’s page. Please clarify. 2A00:23C7:E284:CF00:59B8:7E4B:2A19:70BF ( talk) 23:03, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
Should the title of Duke of Lancaster not be part of the list? I understand that it is held by the monarch but it is a dukedom nonetheless. Vesuvio14 ( talk) 19:47, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref group=Notes>
tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=Notes}}
template (see the
help page).