Earl of Devon questions

379 views
Skip to first unread message

bx...@yahoo.com

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 8:20:46 AMOct 9
to Peerage News
Is he the only current peer for which there is no secondary title?  Was there a reason why no secondary title was ever created?

Thanks.

Brooke

marquess

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 8:42:57 AMOct 9
to Peerage News
The earldom of Lincoln comes to mind, also the earl Temple of Stowe.  Huntingdon also has no subsidiary title

dpth...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 10:02:18 AMOct 9
to Peerage News
The earldom of Devon was created 1553, before the practice began of bestowing subsidiary titles when creating earls,etc.

Same thing for Lincoln, created in 1572.

Same thing for Huntingdon, created in 1529. In that case, the 1st Earl did inherit some Baronies from his mother, but they later passed to heirs female while the earldom passed to heirs male.

The earldom of Temple of Stowe was itself a subsidiary title, but had a special remainder causing it to pass away from all the other titles of the Dukes of Buckingham.

dpth...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 10:15:09 AMOct 9
to Peerage News
This may be of interest:  Appendix G to Volume VII of The Complete Peerage:

APPENDIX G 

PEERAGE TITLES OF A HIGHER GRADE 
HELD WITHOUT A BARONY 

In many cases no Baronies appear to have been vested in the early grantees of Earldoms and Dukedoms — e.g. the Earldoms of Cornwall, 1307 ; Cambridge, 1340 ; and numerous creations of members of the Royal family and those connected therewith, as the Earldom of Somerset, 1397 ; the Dukedom of Richmond, 1525. The Earldom of Lincoln, to which the Dukedom of Newcastle-under-Lyne became joined in 1768, is another instance of a peerage title of the highest grade held without a Barony. Omitting Viscountcies, which afford several instances, the following are other examples of superior dignities held without a Barony : the Earldom of Devon since 1553 ; the Earldom of Derby from 1594 to 1628, from 1702 to 1732, and from 1736 to 1832 ; the Earldom of Shrewsbury from 1616 to 1856 ; the Earldom of Huntingdon since 1789 ; the Earldom of Lindsey since 1809 ; and the Earldom of Berkeley since 1882. The last named is one of the numerous Earldoms originating in Baronies which lost the inferior title by the operation of the modern law as to Baronies by Writ. 

Hovite

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 10:17:27 AMOct 9
to Peerage News
(According to The Complete Peerage, 2nd edition) the earldom was created by the Empress Matilda “probably in 1141” for Baldwin de Reviers. The 7th Earl was succeeded by his sister, Isabel, and on her death in 1293, the title apparently passed to a cousin, Hugh de Courtenay. He was summoned to Parliament in 1299 and thereby became Lord Courtenay, and was recognized as Earl of Devon in 1335. So at that point the Earl of Devon was Baron Courtenay. Those titles were forfeited in 1461, restored in 1470, and forfeited again on 14 April 1471. When John de Courtenay was killed unmarried on 4 May 1471, any rights to his forfeited titles would have passed to his childless brothers and then fallen into abeyance between his sisters and their descendants. Meanwhile, the earldom was restored to (and forfeited by) the heir male (which was possibly a mistake), so the barony and earldom became separated.

Eleanor Doughty

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 10:19:27 AMOct 9
to peerag...@googlegroups.com
Surely his courtesy title is Lord Courtenay? Charlie Devon has told me himself that his son is Lord Courtenay - is it not official? Seems bizarre but I’m not near Debretts to check 

Sent from my iPhone

On 9 Oct 2021, at 15:17, Hovite <paulv...@gmail.com> wrote:

 (According to The Complete Peerage, 2nd edition) the earldom was created by the Empress Matilda “probably in 1141” for Baldwin de Reviers. The 7th Earl was succeeded by his sister, Isabel, and on her death in 1293, the title apparently passed to a cousin, Hugh de Courtenay. He was summoned to Parliament in 1299 and thereby became Lord Courtenay, and was recognized as Earl of Devon in 1335. So at that point the Earl of Devon was Baron Courtenay. Those titles were forfeited in 1461, restored in 1470, and forfeited again on 14 April 1471. When John de Courtenay was killed unmarried on 4 May 1471, any rights to his forfeited titles would have passed to his childless brothers and then fallen into abeyance between his sisters and their descendants. Meanwhile, the earldom was restored to (and forfeited by) the heir male (which was possibly a mistake), so the barony and earldom became separated.
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/peerage-news/05900986-4276-4a25-a4d6-6d28dfc0728bn%40googlegroups.com.

dpth...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 10:37:03 AMOct 9
to Peerage News
That is a matter of courtesy and usage. There is no Lordship of Courtenay attached to the Devon earldom.

See footnote here in The Complete Peerage (in later editions Appendix E, Vol. IV.)

S. S.

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 2:25:50 PMOct 9
to Peerage News

Indeed when a family possesses no courtesy title dissimilar from the substantive title (as is the case invariably for Earls only really) the surname is usually substituted for the courtesy title. When both the substantive title and the surname are similar then it is possible to use a part of the territorial designation from a subsidiary peerage that is similar to the substantive peerage should a subsidiary title exist (the Earldom of Kingston comes to mind as the heir apparent is styled Viscount Kingsborough even though the family does indeed possess a Barony of Kingston the heir apparent is styled Viscount Kingsborough even though that subsidiary title in question is actually Viscount Kingston, of Kingsborough in County Sligo). Below are a few examples of invented courtesy titles that come to my mind: 

1.      Earl of Huntingdon: styled as Viscount Hastings; used as such to avoid confusion since there already exists a Baron Hastings.

2.      Earl of Devon: styled as Lord Courtenay; taken from the family surname. 

3.      Earl of Lincoln: styled as Lord Fynes; used as a corruption most likely (I think) of the surname “Fiennes” as in “Fiennes-Clinton”.

4.      Earl of Morton: styled as Lord Aberdour; rather interestingly this invented courtesy title comes from the fact that the 7th Earl of Moreton sold the Barony of Dalkeith (a title which the heir apparent to the Earldom of Moreton previously used) to Francis Scott, 2nd Earl of Buccleuch, thereafter the designation of the Earldom of Morton officially being changed to “Earl of Morton and Lord Aberdour”, with “Aberdour” actually being a property associated with the family.

5.      Earl Temple of Stowe: styled as Lord Langton; taken from the family surname of “Temple-Gore-Langton”.

6.      Earl Belmore: styled as Viscount Corry; taken from the family’s surname of “Lowry-Corry”.

7.      Earl of Caledon: styled as Viscount Alexander; taken from the family’s surname of “Alexander”.

N.B. Huntingdon, Devon, Lincoln, Morton and Temple of Stowe do not possess a subsidiary title at all. Belmore and Caledon do have subsidiary titles but they are the same as their respective earldoms.

malcolm davies

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 6:35:46 PMOct 9
to Peerage News
In discussing this topic,it is necessary to remember some basic principles.
First the heir apparent and any second heir apparent are commoners.The only distinction they have from anybody else is their standing in the table of precedence(more of that in a moment).They have no other privileges.
On legal documents they are style by their Christian names,followed by their surname.If they use a courtesy title the words “commonly called…….” are added.
The situation in Scotland is different-the heir apparent is legally known as the “Master of….”        followed by the title.This so,even if the heir uses a courtesy title.Hence the legal name of the Marquess of Loren is his Christian name followed by the words “Master of Argyll”.
This also applies to the second heir,so when the Marquess of Lorne marries and has a son,he will be known as Master of Lorne.
The rule also applies to heirs presumptive so a nephew who is heir is called Master as well.It also applies to female heirs who are called Mistress.
Back to the rights an heir possesses in the table of precedence,as this alters the normal rule as to use of a courtesy title.The eldest son of a duke is ranked immediately behind a marquess and before an earl.Similarly a marquess’s eldest son ranks behind an earl and before a viscount.This accounts for the fact that some dukes have had grandsons or great grandsons where the father is styled as a viscount eg.the Duke of Manchester’s grandson has been styled Lord Kimbolton, notwithstanding his father’s courtesy title being Viscount Mandeville and the great grandson of the 7th Duke of Grafton was styled Lord Sudbury when his father’s courtesy title was Viscount Ipswich.
The use of a particular courtesy title is a matter for the peer concerned.
Courtesy titles have been used where there is no other title or the subsidiary title is the same as the primary one eg. the Duke of Beaufort’s grandson is usually styled Earl of Glamorgan,despite the Duke holding no peerage of that title.Similarly the heir to the Marquess Townshend is styled Viscount Raynham when the Marquess holds no such title.These are only 2 examples-there are others.
There are some peers where the use of a courtesy title differs from generation to generation.Thus the current Marquess of Lansdowne was styled Earl of Shelburne when the heir and his son is styled Earl of Kerry,and this has been the practice in that family in the past,the courtesy titles alternating.Another example is the Earl of Rosebery with the alternate use of Lord Dalmeny or Lord Primrose.
Sometimes the heir does not use the most senior courtesy title avalaible.Thus the Duke of Devonshire’s heir is styled Earl of Burlington rather than Marquess of Hartington,and the Duke of Wellington’s son is styled Earl of Mornington instead of Marquess Douro.
Finally,if a peer disclaims his title,because the peerage still exists,the heir can use a courtesy title.That happened when the present Earl of Durham’s father succeeded and disclaimed his peerage.

dpth...@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 9, 2021, 6:47:02 PMOct 9
to Peerage News
All the different rules and usages are discussed in the lengthy footnote in Complete Peerage.

pyvery

unread,
Oct 13, 2021, 10:19:08 AMOct 13
to Peerage News
I think that the Earls of jersey alternate between two courtesy titles for their heirs.

Two Royal titles are of interest here.

The Duke of Fife had the Earl of macduff as a courtesy title and if the earldom of Southesk had not been inheirited I dont know what an heir of an Earl of Macduff would have been known as.
The current  family could alternate between macduff and Southesk but have stayed with Southesk.
The Dke of Cumberland had the Earl of Armagh as a courtesy title but no other titles were granted.

David Beamish

unread,
Oct 13, 2021, 12:40:38 PMOct 13
to Peerage News
An interesting example (no longer extant) is the dukedom of Windsor, created in 1937 with no subsidiary titles at all. As the duke had no sons (or daughters) the question of a courtesy title for the heir apparent never arose.

malcolm davies

unread,
Oct 13, 2021, 5:22:13 PMOct 13
to Peerage News
Pyvery,
            The !st Duke of Fife was,prior to his marriage 6th Earl Fife and that peerage and subsidiary titles became extinct on his death.Amongst them were the baronies of Braco and Skene,so very likely one of those would have been chosen if the 2nd Duke of Connaught had married and had a grandson in the male line.The Dukedom of Connaught had no subsidiary titles-the 1st Duke's son was known as Prince Arthur of Connaught and his son the 2nd Duke was known as Prince Alistair of Connaught until 1917 when King George V limited the use of such titles.He was thereafter known as Earl of Macduff until he succeeded his grandfather as 2nd Duke.

pyvery

unread,
Oct 14, 2021, 4:52:57 AMOct 14
to Peerage News
The Duke of Connaught was also earl of Sussex.This title being given to him in 1874.

As prince Alistair in 1917 could start using the title earl of macduff no new title was created for him.

The creation of the Dukedom of Albany for Prince leopold in 1881 seems to have been the first time that a Royal Dukedom was created with a subsidiary earldom and barony.
The Victorian Duke of edinburgh and the Duke of Connaught were both given subsidary earldoms but nothing lower.

Peter FitzGerald

unread,
Oct 14, 2021, 5:28:09 AMOct 14
to Peerage News
The early Hanoverians had voluminous titles: the future George II was given a dukedom with a subsidiary title of every rank, as were his two sons who survived to adulthood.

Starting with the sons of Frederick, Prince of Wales, the custom then changed to a double dukedom and a single earldom, with no other titles.

This custom continued with most of the sons of George III, but for his youngest two sons was changed to a single dukedom, single earldom and single barony.

Victoria's sons got a mish-mash: one (Edinburgh) got a single dukedom and two single earldoms (not a double earldom for some reason), another (Connaught and Strathearn) got a double dukedom and single earldom, and the last (Albany) got a single dukedom, single earldom and single barony.

Prince Albert Victor then got a double dukedom and single earldom, and after that (except for the Prince Edward anomaly) I believe it has consistently settled down as single dukedom, single earldom and single barony.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages