English Title

Something Jedediah Stott pointed out in another thread

Well, no, nothing about English titles makes sense
biggrin.gif
. They are what they are, a perpetual minefield for foreigners. How does one address the daughter of a Duke, who is married to a baronet, who happens to be a bishop?

Then if I look at the titles of James II's sons, it would seem, one was created both Duke AND Earl of Cambridge. What's the difference? And could a dukedom/duchy co-exist alongside a lesser peerage with the same title i.e. the X, the Duke of Cambridge and Y, the Earl of Cambridge?
 
The double Cambridge thing was not unique to England. At the same time there were simultaneous Duchesse de La Valiere and Marquis de La Valiere in France.
 
Well, before the split between title and land that would be possible in cases where the Earldom of X was within/part of the Duchy of X e.g Earldom of Lancaster vs Duchy of Lancaster which included said Earldom, the Earldom of Leicester, and Earldom of Derby (IIRC), when first created.
Having the lower title would also imply immediate subordinance to the higher
 
Well, before the split between title and land that would be possible in cases where the Earldom of X was within/part of the Duchy of X e.g Earldom of Lancaster vs Duchy of Lancaster which included said Earldom, the Earldom of Leicester, and Earldom of Derby (IIRC), when first created.
Having the lower title would also imply immediate subordinance to the higher

That's makes the most sense. But it is odd considering that the Duchy of Lancaster situation was created in the 1300s and this took place in the 1660s. Its very odd to me personally but both times the Dukedom was formally created for James and Edger the Earldom was added to it, so maybe it was intended to be normal, a double Duke & Earl I mean.
 
That's makes the most sense. But it is odd considering that the Duchy of Lancaster situation was created in the 1300s and this took place in the 1660s. Its very odd to me personally but both times the Dukedom was formally created for James and Edger the Earldom was added to it, so maybe it was intended to be normal, a double Duke & Earl I mean.

Tis bit odd to be created at the same time. I think in this case in may be a reference to the Hamiltons who were created Earls of Cambridge under Charles I. It may also have been intended that the Duke-Earls would pass the Earldom onto their sons (prior to their deaths) without the King needing to regrant, which may have upset the balance with Parliament at that time
 
It is aberrational, but not heraldically improper. Lancaster is a very special case because the Duchy (not dukedom) of Lancaster is a Palatinate, whereas the earldom is just an ordinary peerage.

The aberration is not limited to duke/earl, there have been other combinations.

Usually the double dip is in the same holder at least initially , but vagaries of descent could separate them.Another way it happened is that the Earl of X is attainted. Y (a different family) is later created Duke of X , then the attainder of the original earldom is reversed.

There were two Baronies of Strange because of a stuff up. The original barony was created in 1299, and fell into abeyance. It was claimed by Lord Derby in 1594, he thought his wife (mother ?) was sole remaining heiress, but another female line still existed. That would not have mattered, except that in 1628 his son was called up in the minor title, thus giving it substantiality. So, once the stuff up was realised, a second creation of the same barony was necessary.Both remained in the house of Stanley until 1702 when the lines separated, one remaining in the Stanleys, the other going to the Murrays .

Such things are deprecated because of the confusion they cause, but they do happen. Like I said, don't expect anything consistent or logical about English titles (and Scottish ones are worse).
 
Basically they are the result of the fact that some titles are more important than others. A Duke outranks an Earl and that outranks a Baron and so on.

So imagine if John Smith does the King a favour and is created a Baronet. Now he's Sir John Smith, Bart.

His son Sir James Smith, Bart. marries well and goes into politics and sucks up to the King and is created Baron Smith of Smithtown*. He's a good politician so the King decides to promote him again. As Earldoms are named after places unlike Baronies which are named after families he becomes Earl of Smithshire (his local county) as well as being Baron Smith. Despite his father still being Baron Smith of Smithtown. His son and heir does now gets the courtesy title Baron Smith of Smithtown despite not actually being Baron Smith of Smithtown and his known as Lord Smith (unlike in Europe no English Baron is ever called Baron, he's just called Lord. God knows why).

After the 1st Earl's death his son William now the 2nd Earl of Smithshire also marries well becoming richer** and picks the right side in various political fights and his promoted again to the rank of Marquess. He can't reuse Smithshire again as that would mean his secondary title (i.e. the courtesy title used by his son) would be the same as his main title so he becomes the Marquess of Randomtown.

William's grandson Edward the 3rd Marquess once again sucks up to the right people and is promoted to a Dukedom. Now he could choose a new title but as the title of Smithshire is well known and linked to his family he decides to reuse the Earldom for his new Dukedom and becomes the Duke of Smithshire. He is now Edward Smith, Duke of Smithshire, Marquess of Randomtown, Earl of Smithshire, Baron Smith of Smithtown, Baronet. Or the Duke of Smithshire for short.


*his hometown where he has his lands. This is used to distinguish him from any other Baron Smith's.

**No matter how useful you were to the King you had to be rich enough to "support your dignity" so a Earl should be richer than a Baron if necessary by the King giving you a some lands and money. Though of course this isn't always the case especially after a few generations the odds of having an incompetent come along and wreck the family fortunes gets pretty high.

For a modern example look at the Duke of Devonshire. Here are his titles:

Duke of Devonshire
Marquess of Hartington;
Earl of Devonshire;
Earl of Burlington;
Baron Cavendish;
Baron Cavendish of Keighley
 
I blame Crusader Kings 2, for giving historically-minded gamers unrealistic expectations of the rationality of medieval-origin titles and jurisdictions.
 
Top