Downton Abbey S3 - spoiler-free until broadcast in the U.S.

Additional musings…

Since Matthew died before the current Earl, he never held the title, “Earl of Grantham”. Thus, Mary will never hold the title, “Countess of Grantham”.

If someone is found who has a better claim than BBC to the title, BBC could sell his interest in the estate to the new heir presumptive. Although, Mary would probably fight this, as it would mean that, once Robert died, Mary, Edith, BBC, Cora, Tom Branson and Syblette would have to vacate Downton Abbey. And Isobel would probably be turned out of Crawley house. But I suppose Violet would still retain the right to live in the Dower House.

If the new earl (or, as heir presumptive) bought out BBC’s share, would Cora et al still be able to move into that teeny tiny country house with “only” 8 servants? Or would the new Earl have the right to say, “Nuh uh! It’s all mine and y’all gotta find some place else”? And then Cora et al move in with her mom.

I think you overstate the case. First of all, it was very common for male lines to eventually fail, and given the problems that Robert has been having in securing his legacy, I’m pretty sure, they would be well aware of every possible heir at this point.

And it’s not likely at all that another third cousin, twice removed would displace Matthew and Mary’s son. In fact, I think it’s impossible. It doesn’t matter when the kid is born—age is not a factor—that’s why any son of Robert’s could displace an heir presumptive. The principle is exclusive male primogeniture, and if Matthew is first in line, then his son is right behind him. There’s pretty much no way for anyone else to get between them.

Master Crawley can’t do anything with the estate until he cames of age, in 1942. Violet would damn near 100 by then, and Cora would have rights to the Dower House as soon as she died. And like I pointed out they aren’t bound by the entail anymore so the estate doesn’t automatically come with the title.

If there was someone with a better claim, they would have found them back when they found Matthew. Short of the new baby dying or Robert having a son, the new baby will be the Earl.

When did that happen? The whole point of an entail is that it can’t be gotten rid of.

Well they *did *talk about opening a small hotel once they were married…

Not to excuse Fellowes, but remember that this episode was the Christmas Special, which in the UK is a standalone episode, shown during the holiday season, months after the regular season has finished airing. So it’s not like he dropped in three short-term stories in the middle of the season; it was a separate episode that obviously had continuing storylines, but also had storylines that could be watched on their own (remember that Mary showed up pregnant and had the baby all in this one episode).

Incidentally, I understand that this episode was shown on Christmas Day in the UK. The ending certainly made a lovely Christmas treat.

That all changed when Robert lost Cora’s fortune, and the estate was in trouble. Robert was preparing to sell Downton, something that would’ve been impossible if the entail was still in effect. Technically he did sell Matthew a 50% share in the estate. Now that Matthew’s dead his share goes to his heirs (Mary & their son) according to whatever formula he devised in his will. In any event binding entails like the Crawleys had will be abolished in 4 yrs.

You can’t assume this. The entire plot of season one centered on the fact that the entail was unbreakable. Unless something explicitly changed then we have to assume it still exists. And even if there is an entail restricting inheritance of the title and the estate, it cannot mean that if Robert went broke he would not be able to sell his property to raise money. There’s something else going on here.

This is something that makes me dislike the British tradition of Christmas specials.

Fellowes was interviewed in the New York Times recently. Matthew is dead, dead, dead. Series 4 will begin six months after his death, so we won’t see any funeral or the immediate reaction to his death…

I think that’s just as well.

No, he has the position of being dead under the wheels of the car.

Here’s the article. I wonder if the delay is part of the contract PBS has with ITV, or if it’s just a scheduling decision on there part. If they aired simultaneously or if the delay was only a week or 2 alot fewer people (myself included :o) would resort to other means.

There was a panel discussion PBS showed on YouTube when the third season first started where someone asked this, and what they said was that January-February is the best time, schedule wise, for them to air the show. They get their best ratings then as they’re not going up against the new TV shows that always start in the fall. They also need time to recut each episode to fit into the PBS time slot, as ITV shows the episodes with commercials. That’s also why some PBS episodes this year had *additional *scenes that were not shown in the UK, because they needed to fill in the extra time originally taken up by the commercials.

So, don’t expect the schedule to be any different next year. The US will again be 4 months behind.

aaaggggghhhh. I just watched the episode. Are you !#@%ing serious.

I’d like to suggest next year each episode has it’s own thread.
Please…

I like it all in one thread because the discussion is not confined to just one episode-- it moves all over the place.

Also ITS own thread, not IT’S own thread. “It’s” is a contraction of “it is.” Counterintuitive, but the possessive doesn’t take an apostrophe.

All this discussion about inheritance and entails is well and good, but it doesn’t answer the burning question: WHO WON THE CRICKET MATCH???

Well it had to be the house team right? All I remember is Molesley out in one bowl, or however you say it.