Sutherland D heirs

[Shinjinee]

Who exactly are the remaining heirs to the dukedom of Sutherland?

The current duke, who succeeded his childless cousin the 6th Duke (previously earl of Ellesmere) has two sons, both married, but with daughters only so far.

The duke (descended from the 3rd Earl of Ellesmere) has no brothers, so the next heir is a distant cousin (descended from a younger son of the 1st Earl), who has only a daughter b 1991, and his brother Fulke.  Then there are some other cousins of this cousin, but they are either unmarried, or have no known issue (to me at least).  However, the website of at least one of these cousins indicates a partner or spouse and offspring.

1.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_of_Sutherland

says that this is the line of succession:

1. James Egerton, Marquess of Stafford (b. 1975). Elder son of the 7th Duke.
   Married, with three daughters.
2. Lord Henry Alexander Egerton (b. 1977). Younger son of the 7th Duke.  
   Married, with three daughters
3. Simon Francis Cavendish Egerton (b. 1949). Great-great-great-grandson of the 1st Earl of Ellesmere through his second son Francis (1824-1895).
   Married with a daughter b 1994.
4. Fulke Charles Granville Egerton (b. 1952). Younger brother of Simon Francis.
   Is he the same man in Texas, an automotive sales pro?
   http://www.linkedin.com/pub/fulke-egerton/28/799/9b0
   
   
5. Nicholas Egerton (b. 1967). Son of Michael Egerton (1924-1979), the younger brother of Anthony Egerton (1921-1985).
   m.2006 Jane Elizabeth Kelly Roberts per Paul Theroff.  His elder brothers died leaving daughters.
   
   
6. Francis David Egerton, [[Frank Egerton]] novelist and tutor at Oxford  (b. 1959). Son of David Egerton (1930-2012)
   A novelist and author, formerly a land agent.  
   m.18 Mar 1995 Jess Mary Owen, per Paul Theroff,
   He has his own Wikipedia article as "Frank Egerton"
   

As the Wikipedia article says, there are heirs in remainder to the marquessate of Stafford (cr for the father of the 1st Duke), through the earls Granville.  Not so many heirs, but there are or were heirs in remainder descending from the 1st Earl Gower, via Admiral Hon John Leveson-Gower married to Frances Boscawen, sister of the 3rd Viscount Falmouth and the Duchess of Beaufort. 

 

[malcolm davies]

Shininjee,

                You are right to point out the shortage of male heirs to the ducal title.But there are other ducal titles in a worse position.The only heir to the Westminster dukedom is Earl Grosvenor and if he does not marry and have a son the dukedom will become extinct(however the same was true before the current dukes marriage and it took a while before he had a son).Similarly if Edward Fitgerald(the Duke of Leinster's nephew) does not marry and have a son that title will become extinct.The consequences there are more dramatic as, unlike Sutherland & Westminster where a marquessate will continue,all of the Leinster titles,including the Earldom of Kildare dating back to 1316 will become extinct(it is worthwhile pointing out that this prospect has been in contemplation before as the 1st Duke was the only heir to the peerages but married Lady Emily Lennox daughter of the 2nd Duke of Richmond and proceeded to father 19 children including 9 sons.)

  Recently the Marquessate of Cholmondely and the Earldom of Shaftesbury have come back from the dead so to speak with the birth of sons to the current holders of the peerages.

[Shinjinee Sen]

To be honest, I would be sadder if the dukedom of Leinster and all its associated titles died out, because, as you say, it is a very old clutch of titles stemming back to those Anglo-Norman-Irish families that settled in Ireland post Henry II (and his son and grandson).  

The marquessate of Lansdowne was also looking shaky (another set of  old Irish titles) but the current marquess's nephews have rescued the family for another generation, or so I believe. The present heir is still unmarried, and his brother has only daughters (although his wife was born 1982, I think).

Shaftesbury and Scarborough (the endangered one) have one heir each - an heir apparent and heir presumptive, respective.  Both titles stem from the Stuart Restoration to the post 1688 settlement.  The 1st Earl of Shaftesbury was part of the CABAL, and the 1st Earl of Scarborough one of the Immortal Seven - as in those who invited William III and Mary to overthrow James II - but did less well in the titles department than the others (ducal rank etc).

Shinjinee


Shinjinee

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Peerage News" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/peerage-news/SRBhq-y-hn4/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Henry W]

This title appears more precarious 5 years later.

Updates of which I am aware:

- Fulke Charles Granville EGERTON died 2017 - https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/statesman/obituary.aspx?pid=185209036

- The Marquess of Stafford now has 4 dau, with Lady Charlotte EGERTON born 2015.

I am not aware of any issue of Nicholas or Francis EGERTON. The only hope appears to be that the sons of the current Duke keep trying or somehow there is an heir who has escaped notice.

[marquess]

I suspect that in all likely hood, that if the present state of affairs continues then the dukedom will become extinct  in about 40 years time. I hope that this will not be the case, but if it is so, there are at least heirs to the marquisate, which though not as high in rank as a dukedom, is at least a rare honour in the UK peerage system, and a much underrated one at that too. 

[malcolm davies]

Marquess,I agree.

The Sutherland title will almost certainly become extinct,absent divorce and remarriage of the current heir and his brother-the only question is whether that will occur with the death of the current heir as 8th Duke or his brother if he succeeds.

Since my posting on this topic some 5 years ago,Edward Fitgerald has married but there are no children of the marriage as yet.

Have you noticed that there seems to be no hurry for married ducal heirs to produce children-Dalkeith has as yet no children,likewise Blandford,Bowmont,Seymour,& Graham.Arundel only has a daughter.There is also no signs of children from second heirs eg Lord Max Percy and Lord Edward Innes Ker.

Lets hope this changes soon.

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Hope Sussex starts a trend!

Brooke

[Shinjinee]

I'm not sure but I believe that Lord Seymour, elder son of the Duke of Somerset, is divorced from his wife the former Arlette Lafayedneey. The Duke himself has been long separated from his Catholic wife, the former Judith-Rose Hull, and is currently with a thrice divorced lady who has appeared in Peerage News.

The Norfolk dukedom has lots of collateral heirs so is in no danger of extinction as yet. The Earl of Arundel and his Countess are still in their early thirties, and the Earl has two younger sons. And a younger brother, a nephew and lots of first cousins. And Thete are other branches, some with their own titles.

Northumberland is less secure but also has collaterals. Earl Percy is not married, while Lord Max is married but has no issue as yet. (His wife's brother Franz Albrecht v Oettingen Spielberg has one daughter and is expecting a second child). But the Duke's youngest brother Lord James Percy has two sons, and there are some collateral heirs. Not all heirs bother to update genealogical works.

I suppose the Sutherland heirs could keep trying a few more times, if they think it necessary.

Of the royal dukedoms, Cambridge has two heirs but the dukedom is very likely to merge into the Crown. Sussex has one heir, as we know. York has no heirs. Wessex (future Edinburgh) has one heir. Edinburgh itself will merge into the Crown within a generation or two, but in theory there are plenty of heirs: nine heirs. Gloucester has two heirs in successive generations.

Kent is the most secure with two heirs in successive generations, then Lord Nicholas with three sons, and Prince Michael and his son Lord Frederick with no heirs. Eight heirs in succession.

Cheers, Shinjinee

[pyvery]

Ducal heirs:

If I  am correct I think that Graham and Dalkeith have no children but both have brothers who have married in the last two years.Blandford married last year and Bowmont is divorced as is Seymour but Bowmont's brother has also recently got married ,but like Graham and Dalkeith he does not yet have a male line nephew.

[malcolm davies]

Shininjee,

               My point was that,compared with the past,heirs have not been quick to have children after marriage,which for succession purposes can lead to extinction.

  And another point-a suplus of heirs does not always lead to security for the title.As an example,consider that the 1st Duke of Westminster had 9 sons.2 died as infants,not long after birth.1 died at the age of 18.5 of the remaining 6 married,producing 5 male heirs between them.Of those 5,one did not marry and the other 4 produced 3 male heirs,one of whom died aged 5(Earl Grosvenor,son of the 2nd duke,one died aged 19(Hugh grandson of Lord Arthur Grosvenor son of the 1st Duke) and the third was the 6th Duke,who as we know had one son,the 7th Duke.If we had been writing at the time of the 1st duke's death we would no doubt have predicted that in the fourth generation there would have been at least 20 male heirs,rather than 3.