A man was arrested (and then “de-arrested”) after shouting “who elected him?” at a proclamation ceremony in Oxford.
I do hope he shouted, “Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I’m being repressed!” as he was arrested. 
Your basic Lèse-majesté. Don’t forget, for that, they can still lock you in a dungeon and throw away the key:
Charles became Duke of Edinburgh upon Phillip’s death and now that title has become merged with the crown
- Will Edward be made Duke of Edinburgh as has been rumored?
- If so, will it be before or after Charles coronation? I’m thinking before so he can wear the duke coronet at the ceremony like his brothers.
Next question: Given that Harry has retired from the royal part of the Royal family,
- Upon Andrew’s death will Charles make Harry the Duke of York?
- If reserved for William’s children and with the new primogeniture rules, would Charlotte become Duchess of York in her own right as the second child OR would it be Louis as the second son.
And I know the primogeniture rules only applied to succession so I guess the real (and larger) question is will Charles incorporate true primogeniture when writing the letter patent for title-holders and their successors (not limited to male line anymore)
So third question: will we see the first non-royal dukedom created since 1874?
Harry already has a dukedom (Sussex); giving him a second would be odd at any time, and extremely odd given his circumstances.
Who are you thinking would be created a non-royal duke?
@slash2k I’m really impressed with your knowledge of All Things Considered Royal. Unless you’re just a speedy researcher… but no, I get the feeling you already know all this stuff. How come?
And if you’re quite knowledgeable about nobility titles and such, I have a pet peeve that I want to ask you about. I’ll PM you, as it’s not about the monarchy.
I can’t think of anyone off-hand right now. Arthur Wellesley was the last untitled commoner to be made a Duke so I think it would be like in 1874 when an Earl was made into a Duke, like if the Earl of Warwick does something of note.
In my (controversial) opinion Margaret Thatcher should have gotten a title in her own right after he time as PM. I know at the time women received titles by their husband getting a title but with the type of woman Thatcher was, that seems almost insulting. Was her work worthy of a hereditary Dukedom? I’d say yes but then again I’m just a colonist.
Can Charles (different than will Charles), as the font of honors, change all of the current letters patent to allow females to inherit titles OR would Charles have to strip everyone of their titles (if he even can) and re-issue letters patents?
She did, and in spades: Baroness, the Order of the Garter and the Order of Merit (both of the latter in the personal gift of the monarch). And she got her husband a hereditary baronetcy too.
Thatcher was created a life peer in her own right: Baroness Thatcher of Kesteven, which gave her the right to sit in the House of Lords. (She did speak fairly regularly in the Lords and maintained an office there until her health declined too much.) Denis Thatcher was made a baronet, which is a hereditary title but not technically a peerage (and never came with a seat in the Lords).
Life peers have been the standard choice to honor “the great and good” over the past half-century; former prime minister Harold Macmillan (created Earl of Stockton in 1984) was the last non-royal made a hereditary peer.
@ThelmaLou : I do some speedy research to check dates and such, but I’ve been way too obsessed with British royalty ever since I stayed up all night to watch Charles and Diana marry. Sure, PM away; I don’t know that I can answer, but maybe.
Charles would have to re-issue the letters patent with new rules, but that doesn’t really strip everyone of the titles they presently hold. To use the Fife example above, Alexander Duff held two dukedoms: Duke of Fife under the 1889 creation, and Duke of Fife under the 1900 creation. The former became extinct when he died without male heir, and his elder daughter inherited the second.
What that means in practical terms is that if Charles recreates the titles, then each could split: there’d be TWO Earls Spencer, for example, since Louis Spencer would inherit the currently-extant title and his older sister Lady Kitty would inherit the new gender-neutral one. Meanwhile, the Dukedom of Kent would not split, at least in this generation, since the heir under the existing letters patent is older than his sister.
Whether the King can revoke a title is a constitutional question, and most experts say no, he cannot; only Parliament can. See the example of the Titles Deprivation Act 1917, suspending the titles of those “who have adhered to His Majesty’s enemies” in the First World War.
Hence my confusion. Thanks for clarifying.
She did. She was the Baroness Thatcher. Since WWII there haven’t been any hereditary peerages given to politicians. I doubt that will ever happen again.
If Parliament can revoke titles, could it also legislate to amend the succession to peerages to make it gender-neutral?
Ha! I got up in the middle of the night to watch their wedding, too.
If the Queen got over it, I should also be able to, but it sticks in my craw that Camilla has the word “queen” in her title. Even though I’m positive that she and Charles are soulmates and belong together.
I’ll PM you later.
I see a lot of news articles referring to her as “Queen Consort” I honestly don’t know if
That is historical and in the news Queen Elizabeth (Bowes-Lyon), Queen Mary, Queen Alexandra, et al. were referred to as “Queen Consort”
OR
Specifically in this case to distinguish from using “Queen” which has for the last 70 years meant Queen Regnant
OR
Hey we have to call her queen but let’s qualify it to make it sound less prestigious.
I imagine they’re calling her “the Queen Consort” because the term “the Queen” is so firmly embedded in people’s minds as referring to QE2. I could be mistaken but I believe the style “Queen Camilla” would only be appropriate for a dowager.
He doesn’t ‘bilong Misis Kwin’ any more, so this is presumably out of date.
King Charles seems rather “peckish” in a couple of videos making the rounds, and I don’t mean in the hungry sense. I don’t know much about him really and so I don’t know if he’s always been that way or if his temper is short due to current conditions, but I do wonder if he’s going to be as loved as his mother was or his children are.
I’m hoping that he’s just unduly stressed and that he will grow into the role.
I remember Charles giving a speech in the 90’s and a gust of wind took a page of his speech away. Without missing a beat he said something like, “You all just got lucky.” and went on. He seemed very down to Earth in that moment so I hope he’s like that as king.
The King is free to create hereditary peerages that descend by full coagnatic primogeniture going forward (indeed this has always been possible), but it would take an act of parliament to change how any existing peerage descends. I think it’s very unlikely that any more hereditary peerages will be created outside of the royal family.
Queen Elizabeth specifically requested that Camilla be given this title.
This has been mentioned in several news articles. That’s what I meant when I said, “If Queen Elizabeth can get over it, I should…”
Not a chance.