Title for Prince Harry?

[Thackery Earwicket]

I know this has been done before (last one I promise) but I want people current thoughts on it.

What titles do you think that Prince Harry will get if and when he marries? We already know that he'll be Duke of Sussex, but what subsidiary titles?

[Michael Rhodes]

Sussex is by no means certain. Clarence may be in with a chance.  The subsidiary titles depend on the choice of dukedom. A Scottish dukedom would see an earldom from England (Northallerton?), and a viscountcy or barony hailing from Ireland or Wales. 

Have we had a Royal dukedom from Wales? Cardiff? Or is this encroaching on the Prince of Wales's territory? The Merioneth title, and that of Greenwich will be open for grabs after the demise of the Duke of Edinburgh of course.

-=-

[Thackery Earwicket]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/prince-harry-promised-the-title-duke-1699099

I simply assumed it was Sussex due to a couple of articles saying it was, as well as his wikipedia page.

And isnt Clarence an earldom to one of the attainted royal german dukedoms like albany or cumberland (cant remember the correct verb)

I'd like to a scottish or welsh Dukedom, we need more them

[Peter FitzGerald]

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 11:53:28 AM UTC+1, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/prince-harry-promised-the-title-duke-1699099

I simply assumed it was Sussex due to a couple of articles saying it was, as well as his wikipedia page.

And isnt Clarence an earldom to one of the attainted royal german dukedoms like albany or cumberland (cant remember the correct verb)

Yes, the Earldom of Clarence was created alongside the suspended Dukedom of Albany (and Barony of Arklow). However, given that that branch of the family stopped requesting approval for their marriages under the Royal Marriages Act, it's arguable that all those titles are now extinct, rather than simply suspended.

As William's titles were England-Scotland-Ireland, I would have thought it likely that Harry's will have either an Irish or a Welsh earldom. (Cardiff is unavailable, by the way - the Marquess of Bute is also Baron Cardiff. Carmarthen or Flint, maybe, if it's Welsh, or maybe a modern county like Gwent.)

[Thackery Earwicket]

I dont think Carmarthen will be used because it was only made extinct relatively recently
What about Duke of Sussex, Earl of Flint, Viscount Bushmill, Baron Birkhall

I'd like to see a Marquessate made buts its doubtful seeing as even a non royal title it hasnt been made for over a century

[Turenne]

Where's 'Bushmill'? 

RL

[Thackery Earwicket]

Northern Ireland

[Turenne]

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 6:31:41 PM UTC+1, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

Northern Ireland

I've found 'Bushmills', but not 'Bushmill'...

RL 

[Thackery Earwicket]

must have left out the "s", sorry.

[Turenne]

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 6:47:09 PM UTC+1, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

must have left out the "s", sorry.

No apology needed. 

I rather doubt that Harry will be given a title that is the same as a make of whisky. That said; I'm inclined to think that a Scottish dukedom is likely; especially in light of Alec Salmond's pathetic efforts to make Scotland independent. Funnily enough; there aren't too many old shire names available, so HM may have to go for a new title like Grampian, or one named after one of the Western Isles like Benbecula. 

RL

[Thackery Earwicket]

Duke of Avondale, Ross, Wigtown?

Ross is a strong possibility hasnt been used in donkeys

Avondale is a good choice

Wigtown probably not due to the name itself Wig-town, if Harry balds in the future the mocking would be horrible

[Turenne]

Avondale is a good choice, though it is normally tied to Clarence. Ross is nice because it's an old Stewart title.

RL 

[Thackery Earwicket]

Monmouth should be allowed again, its not like its going be remade for The Duke of Buccleuch again 

They could also actually make the Dukedom of Kendal that was promised to  Leopold of Belgium before he became king, and also they could also make him Duke of Greenwich or Merioneth (welsh title), as a sign to his grandfather who is Baron Greenwich, unless he is not deceased at this time already.

[malcolm davies]

There are a number of extinct dukedoms which have no royal connection which could be used eg.Dorset,Buckingham,Newcastle,Hereford(yes I know there is a viscountcy in that name),Leeds,Kingston,Kendal,Cleveland,Greenwich(only after his father succeeds to the Crown as it is a title of his grandfather Prince Philip) & Berwick.There are possible objections to some eg Cleveland and Buckingham because previous holders were notorious.Other counties unused are Middlesex & Hampshire(or Southampton notwithstanding the barony in that name).If the use of the word shire is permitted then Lancashire and Lincolnshire could be used.The titles of the late Marquess of Carisbrooke are also available.

Note that when the Duke of Windsor was created a Duke there was already in existence the barony of Windsor,then and now possessed by the Earl of Plymouth.

So to sum up-there's plenty of choice.

On Sunday, 19 May 2013 06:19:29 UTC+10, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

[Jonathan]

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 8:31:18 AM UTC+1, Michael Rhodes wrote:

Sussex is by no means certain. Clarence may be in with a chance.  The subsidiary titles depend on the choice of dukedom. A Scottish dukedom would see an earldom from England (Northallerton?), and a viscountcy or barony hailing from Ireland or Wales. 

Have we had a Royal dukedom from Wales? Cardiff? Or is this encroaching on the Prince of Wales's territory? The Merioneth title, and that of Greenwich will be open for grabs after the demise of the Duke of Edinburgh of course.

Presumably the Duke of Edinburgh's titles will only become available following the death of both the Duke and the Queen. The dukedom and its subsidiary titles would in the first instance be inherited by the Prince of Wales and could only be re-created once they had merged with the Crown. I would rather put my money on the Queen still being around at the time of Harry's wedding than the Duke.

The Edinburgh title has been promised to the Earl of Wessex, but here the same applies again. Someone did once find a scenario (albeit highly unlikely and involving some sad, untimely deaths) where a daughter of William could inherit the crown, but Harry would inherit the Dukedom of Edinburgh, hence preventing Edward ever from having it - a scenario ever so slightly more likely with the change in succession to the Crown.

(first copy of this message deleted due to a typo)

[Peter FitzGerald]

On Monday, May 20, 2013 6:33:45 AM UTC+1, malcolm davies wrote:

There are a number of extinct dukedoms which have no royal connection which could be used eg.Dorset,Buckingham,Newcastle,Hereford(yes I know there is a viscountcy in that name),Leeds,Kingston,Kendal,Cleveland,Greenwich(only after his father succeeds to the Crown as it is a title of his grandfather Prince Philip) & Berwick.There are possible objections to some eg Cleveland and Buckingham because previous holders were notorious.Other counties unused are Middlesex & Hampshire(or Southampton notwithstanding the barony in that name).If the use of the word shire is permitted then Lancashire and Lincolnshire could be used.The titles of the late Marquess of Carisbrooke are also available.

Note that when the Duke of Windsor was created a Duke there was already in existence the barony of Windsor,then and now possessed by the Earl of Plymouth.

So to sum up-there's plenty of choice.

 

I think it's incredibly unlikely that a title will be chosen that duplicates an existing one, particularly when (as you say) there's plenty of choice. That excludes Hereford, Kingston (there is an Irish Earldom of Kingston) and Southampton.

 

Windsor was an exception (essentially a surname title essentially chosen, I strongly suspect, to avoid associating its holder with any place in the UK other than the traditional home of the Royal Family) and I doubt it would ever be treated as a precedent. 

[Peter FitzGerald]

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 10:52:49 PM UTC+1, Turenne wrote:

Hasn't Avondale only been used with Clarence once (for Prince Albert Victor's dukedom)? The earlier Clarence double-peerage was "Clarence and St Andrews". I think it's an unlikely dukedom, but would be a good option for a Scottish subsidary title.

 

Ross is almost certainly out because there's an Irish Earldom of Rosse.

[Peter FitzGerald]

There are a few - Banff, Dumbarton, Clackmannan, Berwick, Kirkcudbright and Wigtown are all available, I believe. Berwick's probably the most likely out of them.

 

I do like the idea of Duke of Grampian, though. Tayside is another modern option.

[marquess]

I just hope that there is a marquisate with whatever dukedom Harry is given.

[Turenne]

For those who are suggesting Berwick. There is already a dukedom of that name in the Spanish 'peerage'. There is also the possibility that if the English peerage is not forfeit, that the current Duke of Peñaranda de Duero bears the title Duke of Berwick.

RL 

[Michael Rhodes]

Prince Albert Victor, grandson of Queen Victoria, was created Duke of Clarence & Avondale and Earl of Athlone, 24 May, 1890 despite the fact that the Earldom of Clarence had been awarded 24 May, 1881 to his uncle, Prince Leopold, along with the Dukedom of Albany and Barony of Arklow.

[Peter FitzGerald]

On Monday, May 20, 2013 3:03:05 PM UTC+1, Turenne wrote:

 

For those who are suggesting Berwick. There is already a dukedom of that name in the Spanish 'peerage'. There is also the possibility that if the English peerage is not forfeit, that the current Duke of Peñaranda de Duero bears the title Duke of Berwick.

 

 

I don't think titles in foreign nobilities have ever prevented the creation of British titles.

 

And in relation to the latter point the position of the British authorities seems to be that the English Dukedom of Berwick is forfeit. It certainly didn't prevent the creation of the Barony of Berwick in the Peerage of Great Britain (created 1784, extinct on the death of the 9th Baron in 1953).

[Peter FitzGerald]

On Monday, May 20, 2013 3:22:30 PM UTC+1, Michael Rhodes wrote:

Prince Albert Victor, grandson of Queen Victoria, was created Duke of Clarence & Avondale and Earl of Athlone, 24 May, 1890 despite the fact that the Earldom of Clarence had been awarded 24 May, 1881 to his uncle, Prince Leopold, along with the Dukedom of Albany and Barony of Arklow.

 

It sometimes seems to be okay if the title is doubled (which is presumably why he was Duke of Clarence and Avondale and not simply Duke of Clarence). Doubled royal titles are long out of fashion, though.

 

It was probably also a factor that the Earldom of Clarence is/was a subsidary title, and given the royalty of its holders was not likely ever to be used (certainly not before Albert Victor succeeded to the throne, anyway, as of course was then anticipated).

[Pat]

I think the fact that William was named Duke of Cambridge does rather suggest that when its Harry's turn the monarch will stick to titles that have a previous royal connection. On that basis I would have thought that Sussex or Clarence would have been the frontrunners. Outside of those two dukedoms I can't think of any others that have been used in the last 300 years which are available, the rest are either still in use (Edinburgh, Gloucester, Kent), attainted (Cumberland and possibly Albany) or the area they are linked with is no longer part of the UK (Connaught). 

[Thackery Earwicket]

Im beginning to like the sound of Duke of Grampian, unlikely though, what about using a title associated with physical features eg. mountain ranges (earl of snowdon) rivers (viscount severn)...being irish im not truly familiar with british geography so some suggestions maybe?
still like the sound of Duke of Flint/Earl of Flint :)

and in the future when Prince William has children say he has three (seeing as they are in their early thirties) then royal titles will be used up, so new titles will have to be made thereafter (hopefully)

[ThomasFoolery]

How about *Earl of Grantham*?  : )

[ThomasFoolery]

By the way, you know you're a bit of a peerage nerd, like me, if during the scene where Lady Grantham slips on the soap causing a miscarriage of a male heir, your first thought is, "Damn, now I'm never going to find out the family's courtesy title!"

[Thackery Earwicket]

great minds think alike and FOOLS seldom differ lol :)
i was actually so close to proposing marquess of flintshire :)

[Observer]

Grampian comes over as one of those manufactured local government regions. How about Cardiff or Canterbury? Another outing for Sussex may be best (and the best bet).

[Thackery Earwicket]

Cardiff occupied, Canterbury extinct 70 odd years

what major cities and major towns except london are now used as territorial designations currently?

[Turenne]

On Tuesday, May 21, 2013 1:16:28 AM UTC+1, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

Cardiff occupied, Canterbury extinct 70 odd years

what major cities and major towns except london are now used as territorial designations currently?

The main ones not used are Birmingham and Wolverhampton, also the county of Shropshire (Cheshire and Worcestershire are covered by Chester and Worcester). Hampshire. Brighton, Leeds, Salford, Wakefield and Lisburn are all worth considering.

RL

[John Horton]

From: peerag...@googlegroups.com [mailto:peerag...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Turenne
Sent: 21 May 2013 08:56
To: peerag...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Title for Prince Harry?

Although the etymology is nowhere as obvious, Shropshire is covered by Shrewsbury.

 

John Horton

 

This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.   Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.

[Peter FitzGerald]

On Tuesday, May 21, 2013 9:07:51 AM UTC+1, john....@nottingham.ac.uk wrote:

From: peerag...@googlegroups.com [mailto:peerag...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Turenne
Sent: 21 May 2013 08:56
To: peerag...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Title for Prince Harry?

On Tuesday, May 21, 2013 1:16:28 AM UTC+1, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

Cardiff occupied, Canterbury extinct 70 odd years

what major cities and major towns except london are now used as territorial designations currently?

The main ones not used are Birmingham and Wolverhampton, also the county of Shropshire (Cheshire and Worcestershire are covered by Chester and Worcester). Hampshire. Brighton, Leeds, Salford, Wakefield and Lisburn are all worth considering.

 

Although the etymology is nowhere as obvious, Shropshire is covered by Shrewsbury.

 

And there is an Earl of Lisburne.

[Turenne]

Yes; I'm not sure why the earldom has an 'e' though... 

RL

[Michael Rhodes]

Of course if he makes Miss Cressida Bonas his duchess then a Hampshire title might be considered. She was born in Winchester, 

[Thackery Earwicket]

they really should make a title for London, it is the capital, if they are willing to give it to chrchill why not give it to a royal, I doubt Harry will be a heroic Wartime PM but he still the only one whos actually fought in wars in decades and the family is based in the city.

[Thackery Earwicket]

Brighton and Hampshire sound good too

[ThomasFoolery]

Any chance any of the other Royal residences/estates could ever be used?  Someone mentioned Buckingham and of course Windsor, but what about others?  Duke of Sandringham, Earl of Balmoral, Baron Saint James?  Lord Highgrove perhaps?

[Thackery Earwicket]

Lord Birkhall, Kensington, Holyrood, Tamarisk etc. it goes on

[Michael Rhodes]

We have an Earl of Buckinghamshire. The title Duke of Windsor is perhaps consigned to history?

[John Horton]

From: peerag...@googlegroups.com [mailto:peerag...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Rhodes
Sent: 22 May 2013 06:47

To: peerag...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Title for Prince Harry?

 

>We have an Earl of Buckinghamshire. The title Duke of Windsor is perhaps consigned to history?

Put aside, perhaps, against its being required one day in circumstances similar to those when it was first created.

 

[Peter FitzGerald]

On Tuesday, May 21, 2013 11:35:03 PM UTC+1, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

Lord Birkhall, Kensington, Holyrood, Tamarisk etc. it goes on

 

There is already a Lord Kensington.

[Peter FitzGerald]

On Wednesday, May 22, 2013 6:47:09 AM UTC+1, Michael Rhodes wrote:

We have an Earl of Buckinghamshire.

 

That title (created 1746) didn't, however, prevent the creation of a Marquessate of Buckingham (in 1784) or a Dukedom of Buckingham and Chandos (in 1822).

 

The bigger issue, I think, is that previous examples have shown that (with a few exceptions) creations are generally of titles that have never been used before (Merioneth, Wessex, etc.) or that are generally considered "Royal" (Cambridge, Edinburgh, York, Strathearn, etc.). I think it's unlikely they'll use a title that's formed part of the general (non-Royal) peerage for so long.

[John Horton]

From: peerag...@googlegroups.com [mailto:peerag...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter FitzGerald
Sent: 22 May 2013 09:36

To: peerag...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Title for Prince Harry?

As a relatively recent counter-example – Kent?

 

 

[Jonathan]

 

>We have an Earl of Buckinghamshire. The title Duke of Windsor is perhaps consigned to history?

Put aside, perhaps, against its being required one day in circumstances similar to those when it was first created.

You mean the next time the heir to the throne is married to a divorcee?
 

[Michael Rhodes]

A list of peerages conferred on members of the royal family. 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Danbarnesdavies/Royal_peerages

[John Horton]

Just the next time there is a (living) former monarch. In the Netherlands, that person reverts to being a prince or princess. We now know what happens in the Vatican State. No doubt there are other examples too.  

 

From: peerag...@googlegroups.com [mailto:peerag...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan
Sent: 22 May 2013 10:46
To: peerag...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Title for Prince Harry?

 

 

 

>We have an Earl of Buckinghamshire. The title Duke of Windsor is perhaps consigned to history?

Put aside, perhaps, against its being required one day in circumstances similar to those when it was first created.

You mean the next time the heir to the throne is married to a divorcee?
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Peerage News" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to peerage-news...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to peerag...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/peerage-news?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Turenne]

On Saturday, May 18, 2013 9:19:29 PM UTC+1, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

I know this has been done before (last one I promise) but I want people current thoughts on it.

What titles do you think that Prince Harry will get if and when he marries?

It occurs to me that since the earldom of Derby relates to West Derby, in Lancashire (well Merseyside), that the dukedom of Derbyshire is available.

RL

[Thackery Earwicket]

in my oppinion its unlikely, that would be like making him duke of northumbria or cumbria just because they now have different names for old counties

[Turenne]

On Sunday, June 2, 2013 2:40:19 AM UTC+1, Thackery Earwicket wrote:

in my oppinion its unlikely, that would be like making him duke of northumbria or cumbria just because they now have different names for old counties

I'm pretty sure that Derbyshire is still called Derbyshire..:)

RL 

[Thackery Earwicket]

Sorry, my bad, I thought that Derbyshire was just the county of Derby with one those silly -shires put onto it, like Fife into Fifeshire, to be truly honest I don't understand these shire designations, are they put onto the end of counties with a city or town in the county with the same name to differentiate or am I wrong again...:)

And who truly knows what titles Harry will get, I just know the titles I'd like to see him get and I'm sure everyone has a favourite title for each kingdom.

[Michael Rhodes]

On Monday, 3 June 2013 00:18:22 UTC+1, Dapifer de Truchsess wrote:

Sorry, my bad, I thought that Derbyshire was just the county of Derby with one those silly -shires put onto it, like Fife into Fifeshire, to be truly honest I don't understand these shire designations, are they put onto the end of counties with a city or town in the county with the same name to differentiate or am I wrong again...:)

And who truly knows what titles Harry will get, I just know the titles I'd like to see him get and I'm sure everyone has a favourite title for each kingdom.

Have I read somewhere that the Cavendish 1st Earl of Devonshire should have been the 1st Earl of Derbyshire but for an error in drawing up the letters patent? 

[Turenne]

It would certainly make sense. There was an Earl of Devon when William Cavendish was created Earl of Devonshire; and as far as I know, the Cavendishes have no connection with Devon, but of course have long connections with Derbyshire.

RL 

[Peter FitzGerald]

At the time (1618) the Earldom of Devonshire was created, the Earldom of Devon was believed to be extinct. It was only in 1831 that it was held that it had survived the death of the 1st Earl in 1556.

 

A previous creation of the Earldom of Devonshire had become extinct only 12 years earlier (having been created in 1603 for Charles Blount, 8th Baron Mountjoy, and become extinct on his death in 1606).

 

The Earldom of Derby, on the other hand, was very much extant, and its holder at the time (the 6th Earl) was a Knight of the Garter. I suspect he'd have objected vehemently to the creation of an Earldom of Derbyshire (despite his title not referring to the county),

 

In addition, the letters patent for the Cavendish creation apparently specify the title (in Latin) as "Comes Devon", and its holders (like the former Lord Mountjoy) were sometimes called "Earl of Devon".

 

It seems to me extremely unlikely that the title was a mistake, although Michael is right in that it's an oft-cited "fact". Though nowadays X and Xshire titles can happily co-exist, I doubt the same would have applied in the 17th century.

[Dapifer de Truchsess]

Could they make him Duke of Cheshire, if by going by your logic, its using the shire name and not the ancient Chester title that is currently held by the PoW, but must be given to the PoW everytime, not already given like Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay?

[Turenne]

On Wednesday, June 5, 2013 12:10:36 AM UTC+1, Dapifer de Truchsess wrote:

Could they make him Duke of Cheshire, if by going by your logic, its using the shire name and not the ancient Chester title that is currently held by the PoW, but must be given to the PoW everytime, not already given like Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay?

The Cheshire argument probably follows the case for Shropshire (Shrewsbury). It probably wouldn't be accepted by Garter.

RL

[Dapifer de Truchsess]

Sorry I didnt say, my main argument is Cheshire because the earldom of chester even though it is granted to the prince of wales it is never used, much like the earl of carrick title, plus its a more modern version. So when Charles becomes king and if Harry isnt married yet or whatever, and William is up for Prince of Wales instead of making him Earl of Chester save it for a rainy day and maybe give it to Harry. In relation to Shropshire it is a good argument but (theres always a but with me :) ) but the old version namely Shrewsbury is used day to day for the Talbots while the Chester title is hidden behind Dukedoms and a Principality.

[Turenne]

On Wednesday, June 5, 2013 5:16:11 PM UTC+1, Dapifer de Truchsess wrote:

....up for Prince of Wales instead of making him Earl of Chester save it for a rainy day...

I don't think that many of my fellow Cestrians would be happy if the earldom was saved for a 'rainy day'!  :) :) 

RL

 

[Dapifer de Truchsess]

Very well what about kept for the future kings brother so that said title can actually be seen? is it the phrasing or the idea you did not like? :D

[Turenne]

On Wednesday, June 5, 2013 7:06:28 PM UTC+1, Dapifer de Truchsess wrote:

Very well what about kept for the future kings brother so that said title can actually be seen?  is it the phrasing or the idea you did not like? :D

We are proud of the fact that the P of W is Earl of Chester, in the same way as Lancastrians rather enjoy the fact that The Queen is 'Duke of Lancaster'.

RL

[Michael Rhodes]

The Earldom of Munster, available since the demise of the last of the FitzClarences, is now consigned to history as its territory falls in the Irish Republic

[Dapifer de Truchsess]

Very well, ruin my grand plan :)

[www.maltagenealogy.com]

Possible Dukedom for Harry, upon his forthcoming marriage in early 2018, to an American divorcee, I suggest be the Dukedom of Windsor. What better time to bring this title back and maybe rekindle old wounds in the royal family.

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 at 6:19:29 AM UTC+10, Dapifer de Truchsess wrote:

I know this has been done before (last one I promise) but I want people current thoughts on it.

What titles do you think that Prince Harry will get if and when he marries? We already know that he'll be Duke of Sussex, but what subsidiary titles?

[malcolm davies]

I think the Queen would be most reluctant to create a second Dukedom of Windsor-it simply reminds everyone of history they would prefer forgotten.

Also it is capable of leading to confusion.The Earl of Plymouth has the title Viscount Windsor as part of the Earldom,and he is also Baron Windsor, a peerage title that was created by writ of summons in 1529.It is undesirable that there be 2 peerage titles of the same name which are not held by the same person.

The instances in the past are usually the result of a mistake.That was the case with Devon where the Courtenay earldom was thought to be  extinct when the Cavendish earldom was created.The 2 Sutherland titles arise from the fact that the remainders are different and nobody gave any thought to the possibility that the direct male line would fail.

Sussex is what everyone assumes,but the Queen did not create Prince Edward with that title.Other counties without peers of the same name are few-Dorset,Buckingham,Monmouth,Carmarthen,Berwick(subject to the comments about the Spanish dukedom),Ross,Stirling,Wigtown,Ayr,Fermanagh and Down.The cities of Leeds,Newcastle,Swansea & Portsmouth are available although the reputation of the Duchess of Portsmouth may be thought to make that name unsuitable.It should be noted that Prince Harry is descended from the Cavendish and Holles Dukes of Newcastle so it would be quite suitable.

On Sunday, May 19, 2013 at 6:19:29 AM UTC+10, Dapifer de Truchsess wrote:

[www.maltagenealogy.com]

Interesting times ahead !!.

[hopewell]

DO we "know" he'll be Duke of Sussex? I missed that. I'd say let them just be Prince and Princess Harry, but if there are children then it gets difficult. They'd have to Prince or Princess OF somewhere.....
But if he dose marry the divorced American Duke of Windsor does seem pretty spot-on.

[ThomasFoolery]

Would the children of a title-less Prince Harry also be styled Prince/Princess _____ of Wales? At least once they would be entitled to Prince-hood.

[www.maltagenealogy.com]

My thoughts exactly !....

It is likely 

[pablo]

As things stand , legitimate offspring of Prince Harry with no peerage would have the title 'Lord (Louis ) or Lady (Amelia) Mountbatten-Windsor.'
The Queen could change the rules and allow Harry's offspring to have HRH ( as she did for Princess Charlotte, as previously , according to the 1917 letters patent of George V, this was limited to the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales only (i.e Prince George)
If Prince Harry was created a peer then the eldest son would have the courtesy title.
I predict: Duke of Sussex, Earl of Kintyre, Baron Swansea.
When Charles succeeds to the throne these children will be eligible for HRH ( as Andrew's daughters are) or if the streamlining of the family is taken to extremes they may remain with the courtesy titles above (as Edward's children have) .
My feeling is that a new King Charles III ( or George VIi??) will want all his grandchildren to be Royal Highnesses.

[pablo]

Just realised a Baron Swansea already exists.
Baron Caerphilly then ...

[Peter FitzGerald]

As well as the Viscountcy and Barony of Windsor held by the Earl of Plymouth, there is an Earldom of Windsor held by the Marquess of Bute.

Re your other suggestions:

- Monmouth may be considered inappropriate given the attainted Dukedom of Monmouth that would (but for the attainder) be held by the Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry;

- Ross is unlikely due to confusion with the Earl of Rosse;

- Stirling is technically dormant not extinct;

- there is a Viscountcy of Ayr held by the Marquess of Bute;

- there is a Barony of Fermanagh held by the Earl Erne;

- there is both a Marquess of Downshire and a Viscount Downe;

- as noted already, there is a Baron Swansea; and

- there is an Earl of Portsmouth.

[Peter FitzGerald]

There is also a Marquessate of Kintyre and Lorne held by the Duke of Argyll, so Kintyre is also out.