I don’t think the Queen will name a 2nd person Duchess/Duke of Sussex while there is a current incumbent. Harry could cede the title to make it available but for a title at that level It’s Just Not Done. Harry would have to get a higher title, which is sort of difficult, etc.
Yes, only King trumps Duke.
King also beat Riggs.
Something the Court could not do.
Well, isn’t without precedent: Lady Jane Grey’s father, Henry, was given the title of Duke of Suffolk by Edward VI, due to the fact that his wife’s brothers had died in childhood.
That, however, was Tudor England, so it’s very, very unlikely to happen this time around.
She could name her Duchess of somewhere else, though. But she certainly won’t.
If I understand correctly, the style of “HRH” is a separate honor and style, additional to any other substantive or courtesy title, although I’m not sure if it’s possible for anyone to be an HRH withouthaving some other title. Edward and Sophie’s children James and Louise, by default, carry the courtesy titles customary for the children of an Earl, Viscount and Lady Firstname respectively. If further daughters come they will also be Lady Firstname, but any further sons would be mere Honourables. Had Edward been granted a higher title than Earl, then any younger sons would be Lord Firstname.
Nitpick: Edward’s son James is not Viscount James; he’s Viscount Severn.
AFAIK other sons would be Lord Firstname, even with Edward only having an earldom, as the children of princes are treated as the children of dukes (all as younger sons if male) even if their father has no peerage at all. For example, Prince Michael of Kent’s son is styled Lord Frederick Windsor.
As an aside, how old is the rule that life peers can only be barons? I distinctly recall the obituary of some Labour figure, a dyed in the wool union man and socialist, who was created Earl of [working class place he grew up]. The Economist noted (maliciously?) that he was thrilled with the honor, or should I say honour. I want to say this was about 10 years ago, so he might have been made a peer quite some time ago.
That’s all that’s ever been allowed under the Life Peerages Act (1958), or as Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (judges who got to sit in the House of Lords before the courts were changed around) before that. Someone who was given an earldom would have had a hereditary one.
A life peerage could be created in a higher degree, but (AFAIK) it wouldn’t entitle the holder to sit in the House of Lords (that’s why new laws had to be made allowing it). There were a handful given out a long time ago, mostly to women I believe, since the lack of a seat in Parliament didn’t matter as women were prohibited from the House of Lords.
Thanks, my memory no doubt failed me on the title as it did on the name.