Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

[Eric_Lowe]

Will pray for him. He is such a treasure these days.

[Jen_94]

I hope he recovers soon!

[Eric_Lowe]

I hope so too !

[TimM]

I hope he's back home soon.  He's doing rather well for a man his age.

[LauraO]

Indeed he is! Only yesterday he was looking very well as he has been. One of the papers irriated me massivley this morning "Philip in hospital for the 3rd time in 8 months"
I would encourage the "lovely" media to remember that not only is he 91, but also that the Queen Mother was in and out of hospital constantly and she lived to be 101.
Better to be safe.
Looking forward to his being well again soon, best wishes x

[CHRISinUSA]

In a somewhat morbid fashion, the press seems to enjoy cryptically painting the duke's recent ill health as "the start of the end".  Something to write about, I suppose.

Bladder infections are quite common in older folks, as aging abdominal muscles are no longer able to properly empty one's bladder.  In the duke's case, this may be complicated by the coronary stint implanted in December.  Sometimes such patients are given drugs to weaken the immune system (and prevent rejection of the implant), making infections more likely.  That's most likely all this is in the duke's case.

And based on his reputation, I suspect what irritates the duke most about all this would be that his illness is fodder for public and press.  This is a man who seems to view any illness as a weakness, something to be taken care of quickly, quietly and with no fuss - and then get back to work.  To be described in the worldwide media as "frail" and "ill-health" must infuriate him to no end.  A speedy recovery, sir.

[Eric_Lowe]

I think there are new bios of the old duke waiting in the wings to come out after his death. Also Prince Edward, Count of Wessex would become Duke of Edinburgh after his father's death. So Sophie would join the ranks of Camilla & Kate in being a royal Duchess as well.

[CHRISinUSA]

Actually, no, the Earl of Wessex will not become Duke of Edinburgh at his father's death, but rather only after the deaths of both of his parents. 

The inheritance of a Peerage is governed by the remainder in the Letters Patent which created it and cannot be changed, not even by the Sovereign.  The Edinburgh dukedom Letters Patent contained the standard language of remainder, meaning that Charles as eldest son will inherit the peerage at  his father's death.  Then when Charles becomes King, the peerage will merge with the Crown, and only then is free to be created anew for Edward by his brother.

[Eric_Lowe]

Not so sure about that. I think the reason that Edward remained a count was the understanding that he will inherit the title after his father's death. Like when the Duke of Coburg died. The eldest son, the Prince of Wales ( Edward VII) did not also inherit Coburg as well as the throne. So the Duke of Edinburgh (Alfred) got it instead. I think the Queen made the arrangement with Philip on the passing of the title from father to son (Edward). As she is the sovereign, it is possible for her to do so. Edward does not need Charles to become king to be created Duke of Edinburgh. 

[CHRISinUSA]

I'm sorry Eric, but you are simply incorrect.  This was discussed at length here on the forum many times over the past few years. 

Fact #1:  The grant of the Dukedom of Edinburgh in 1947 was to Sir Philip Mountbatten KG and the "heirs male of his body lawfully begotten" - the standard remainder clause when an hereditary peerage is created.  This means that the heir is the eldest son of the grantee - Charles.

Fact #2:  Once the Letters Patent creating a peerage have passed the Great Seal the only way it can be changed is by an Act of Parliament - not even the Sovereign has the power to unilaterally change that.  No exceptions have ever occurred in history.  The Coburg example you quote is totally different - that was the throne of a separate nation, and Edward Prince of Wales renounced his claim to it in favor of his brother.

There are only 2 paths for the Earl of Wessex to become Duke of Edinburgh.  (1) The Queen can grant Prince Philip a second Dukedom of Edinburgh with a special remainder to his third son (similar to the situation with the Dukedom of Fife at the end of the nineteenth century), or (2) the parties involved can wait until the present Dukedom of Edinburgh is merged into the Crown following the deaths of both the Her Majesty The Queen and the present Duke of Edinburgh, and then a new Dukedom of Edinburgh could be granted to the Earl of Wessex.

[CHRISinUSA]

I was just thinking about what scenario would prevent Prince Edward from getting his father's ducal title someday.  I came up with two, but they both require a lot of premature deaths in the royal family.

-  The Queen outlives Phillip, Charles and William, while William had a daughter but no son before his death.  In this scenario, the Edinburgh dukedom ends up passing to Prince Harry (as the senior male heir of Phillip), while the throne goes to William's daughter. 

-  If the same order of deaths mentioned above occurred, but the law of succession is changed to allow the firstborn to succeed the crown regardless of gender, and William's firstborn were a daughter.  Then the Edinburgh title goes to William's (younger) son, while the crown goes to his (elder) daughter.

Can anybody think of another?

[Eric_Lowe]

I don't think so. I think the matter of the Dukedom of Edinburgh has been "settled" on Edward and I don't see Charles or William placing any obstacles on his youngest brother/uncle getting that title. As they both respected the wishes of the Queen & her consort. I believe the Queen will make a special provision on her third son to succeed to the title after her husband passes away.  That had been the understanding all along. Just as Camilla was supposed to be Princess Consort (not Queen) as was agreed during her wedding, there is no stopping her from actually becoming Queen Camilla if Charles chose to allow her so.

[Grace]

I removed my post as I misread Eric's previous one.  Sorry!

[Eric_Lowe]

Prince Philip is the second Duke of Edinburgh. The title was almost given to Prince George when he married Princess Marina of Greece. King George V asked his cousin Queen Marie of Romania if she mind their father's old title given to his youngest son. She said shje did mind as she and her sisters regard themselves as Edinburgh girls. So George became Duke of Kent instead.

[CHRISinUSA]

I don't think so. I think the matter of the Dukedom of Edinburgh has been "settled" on Edward and I don't see Charles or William placing any obstacles on his youngest brother/uncle getting that title. As they both respected the wishes of the Queen & her consort. I believe the Queen will make a special provision on her third son to succeed to the title after her husband passes away.  That had been the understanding all along. Just as Camilla was supposed to be Princess Consort (not Queen) as was agreed during her wedding, there is no stopping her from actually becoming Queen Camilla if Charles chose to allow her so.

You can certainly be infuriating sometimes Eric, when you choose to ignore the most fundamental of facts because you don't want to believe it.  You seem to believe that a peerage is nothing more than a title which can be tossed around to whomever the Monarch chooses at his or her pleasure. 

But it is not - a Peerage is a legally created and legally protected entity under British law.  It was the most powerful legal body in Britain until a couple centuries ago, and because of that it enacted laws to protect its rights against the whims of the King.  The power to CREATE a hereditary peerage remains with the Sovereign (although today it is by convention only exercised with advice of council).  But the power to STRIP or ALTER a peerage after it has been created has not belonged to the Sovereign for centuries. 

And just to further illustrate my point, your last post was also incorrect.  Prince Phillip is NOT the 2nd Duke of Edinburgh, he is the 1st Duke of the 4th Creation.  Calling somebody the 2nd Duke would mean that the holder inherited the title directly from an ancestor.  Phillip did not - he was created directly by King George VI (making him the 1st duke of that creation).

Dukes of Edinburgh, first creation (1726–1760)
Prince Frederick (1707–1751), 1st Duke of Edinburgh (1726–1751). The eldest son of George II, he was created Prince of Wales in 1727 but died before his father.
Prince George (1738–1820), 2nd Duke of Edinburgh (1751–1760). The eldest son of the first duke, he was created Prince of Wales later in 1751. He succeeded his grandfather as George III in 1760, when the title merged in the crown.

Dukes of Gloucester and Edinburgh, second creation (1764–1834)
Prince William (1743–1805), 1st Duke of Gloucester and Edinburgh (1764–1805). He was the younger brother of George III, who created the title for him.
Prince William Fredrick (1776–1834), 2nd Duke of Gloucester and Edinburgh (1805–1834). He was the only son of the first duke and died without issue, thus the title fell extinct.

Dukes of Edinburgh, third creation (1866–1900)
Prince Alfred (1844–1900), 1st Duke of Edinburgh (1866–1900). He was the second son of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, and became the sovereign Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha in 1893. Predeceased by his only son, he died without male issue and the title became extinct.

And finally, the current Duke of Edinburgh, fourth creation (since 1947).