Deaths of Sovereigns, Dukes & Marquesses 1952 - present

[Henry W]

Following discussion in Peerage & Baronetage deaths & births 2023 I thought it would be useful to collate the deaths of high ranking peers in one list

Deaths of Sovereigns, Dukes & Marquesses 1952 - present

Some confirmations of some comments:  it is highly unusual for there to be two consecutive calendar years (2022/23) with 0 high ranking deaths in the peerage,  though I am counting the late Queen's death in my listing.  But focussing just on Dukes, 2 consecutive calendar years without a death is relatively common (there are 9 pairs, and 3 trios of years where this happens).

The following years had 0 deaths in any category: 2023, 2018, 2008, 1998, 1986, 1982, 1966, 1958.  So 8 times in 72 years, or 1 in 9.

1988 was a particularly bad year for deaths:  4 Dukes (incl Newcastle-under-Lyme twice, with its resulting extinction) & 2 Marquesses.  Also this year holds the record for the shortest length of time between two deaths:  3 days between the 13th Duke of St Albans and 10th Duke of Northumberland.

1954 is the "runner up" with 5 deaths (3 Dukes, 2 Marquesses).  These include the 2nd Duke of Albany, whose title had been suspended in 1919.  I include as the 2nd Duke had succeeded to the title at birth in 1884, so had enjoyed the title.  I do not include the Cumberland & Teviotdale dukes as the last person (the 3rd Duke) to enjoy the title died 1923.

I hope other users find this listing useful.

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Thanks, Henry, for your hard work on this.

Brooke

[malcolm davies]

Henry,

          A couple of matters of interest.

First not only did the 11th Duke of Marlborough and the 8th Duke of Wellington die in the same year(2014),but the same thing happened with their fathers(1972).

Second you refer to 1988 being a bad year for,inter alia, ducal deaths.Four ducal deaths in the same year have occurred twice previously-in 1940(Hamilton,Northumberland,Rutland and Bedford) and 1892(Marlborough,Roxbughe,Manchester and Sutherland)

[BREMENMURRAY]

The seventh Marquess of Ailesbury died 15 July 1974 is not included on the list

[BREMENMURRAY]

Neither is the sixth Marquess of Ailesbury died 4 August 1961

[Henry W]

Thanks Bremen.  I've made those corrections and at the same time realised I missed the 5th, 6th & 7th Marquesses of Bristol, who I have also now added.

[BREMENMURRAY]

Of the 24 non royal Dukes only six inherited before 2000.Also the longest held at present Abercorn inherited comparatively recently 1979.This compares with the Marquess of Queensbury 1954,the Earl of Chichester 1944,Viscount Gormanston 1940 and Lord O Neill 1944 

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Chichester, Gormanston and O'Neill are 3 of the last 4   peers left who inherited their peerages because their fathers were killed  in World War II.

The fourth one is a royal peer, the Duke of Kent.

Brooke

[BREMENMURRAY]

Viscount Ullswater succeeded his great grandfather because his father died in the same incident as the Duke of Kent. Lord Chetwode also succeeded his grandfather because his father died on active service and as late as 1959 the Earl of Portarlington succeeded early for the same reason   

[bx...@yahoo.com]

There were many more peers that succeeded as a result of World War II than even that number.    Except for this small handful, the rest of them have since died.

Brooke.

[Henry W]

Deaths of Sovereigns, Princes & Princesses of the Blood Royal, Dukes & Marquesses 1952 - present

I have extended my listing to now include Deaths of the Princes and Princesses of the Blood Royal - it picks up several grandchildren of Queen Victoria.  .  I would be grateful if someone would check it!

I have also given some thought to how to manage "former" persons - I had previously noted a former Sovereign (Edward VIII), although he was a Royal Duke at death, and a former Royal Duke (the 2nd Duke of Albany, whose titles were suspended in 1919).  I have made this a bit more explicit, as well as including the former Princess Patricia of Connaught, even though she relinquished the title in 1919.  This sets the standard by which Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor will be managed when he dies (presuming the current status quo is maintained ) - he would be listed as a Former Royal Duke with a note about the formal removal of titles and striking from the Peerage Roll in 2025.  The important standard of inclusion is that at some point in their lives they would have been regarded by the British government as holding the title even if, for whatever reason, they lost it before death.

I have also given some thought to how to manage "former" persons - I had previously noted a former Sovereign (Edward VIII), although he was a Royal Duke at death, and a former Royal Duke (the 2nd Duke of Albany, whose titles were suspended in 1919).  I have made this a bit more explicit, as well as including the former Princess Patricia of Connaught, even though she relinquished the title in 1919.  This sets the standard by which Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor will be managed when he dies (presuming the current status quo is maintained ) - he would be listed as a Former Royal Duke with a note about the formal removal of titles and striking from the Peerage Roll in 2025.  The important standard of inclusion is tha 

It does not include those who might have claimed the title in pretense.  The two Prince Ernest Augustus, who definitely enjoyed the Princely title, are included as Former Princes, but not as Former Royal Dukes as they were never recognised as succeeding to the Dukedom of Cumberland & Teviotdale which was suspended in 1919.  The situation of the 2nd Prince Ernest Augustus (1914 -  1987) and his siblings is somewhat debatable.  At the moment I have included Ernest Augustus, but I suspect I should be including some more of them.

[Ivan Prekajski]

You should also add Prince George of Hannover (1915-2006), as he and his older brother were princes of Cumberland. 

[colinp]

As great-grandchildren of a Sovereign (Queen Victoria) the children of the 2nd Duke of Albany were HH and (British) Prince/ss under the implied grant by the Letters Patent dated 30 Jan 1864.  It seems to have been the view of the Royal Family and their advisers at the time that the 1917 Letters Patent revoked the royal and princely titles of those who did not fall within its provisions - thus HH Prince Alastair Arthur of Connaught then became known as the Earl of Macduff until his succession as 2nd Duke of Connaught (taking his courtesy title from his mother the Duchess of Fife).  The LP's however contain a proviso  "except those titles already granted and remaining unrevoked" - given Prince Alastair Arthur's titles had not been revoked it seems he was legally still HH and Prince but that clearly was not the view at the time.  The same would apply to the children of the 2nd Duke of Albany.  However if one accepts their titles were revoked by the 1917 LP's then they should be listed as former princes and princesses of the Blood Royal:

Johann Leopold (d 4 May 1972)

Sibylla (later Hereditary Princess of Sweden, d 28 Nov 1972)

Karoline Mathilde (later Countess of Castell-Rudenhausen, d 5 Sep 1983)

Friedrich Josias (d 23 Jan 1998)

Ernst August Duke of Brunswick (d 1953) was (until deprived in 1919) HH and (British) Prince under the implied grant by the 1864 LP's (he is on your list) but his three sisters were HH and (British) Princesses as well.  Two of the three survived until 1952 - Alexandra (later Hereditary Grand Duchess of Mecklenburg-Schwerin) d 30 Aug 1963 and Olga d unm 21 Sep 1958

By Letters Patent dated 17 June 1914 the following great-great-great grandchildren of George III were expressly granted HH and (British) Prince/Princess though they probably already had that status under the 1864 LP's (they were of course already HRH Prince/ss of Hanover):-

Prince Ernst August - on your list

Prince Georg Wilhelm (d 8 Jan 2006) as mentioned by Ivan above

Princess Friederike (later Queen of the Hellenes) (d 6 Feb 1981) who should also be on your list

(the further two children were born after the 1917 LP's)

The Hanoverian situation is complicated by the 1931 decree of the Duke of Brunswick that he and members of his family would bear the title Prince/ss of "Great Britain and Ireland" (an entity which had ceased to exist) but such decree has no legal effect in the UK and it is difficult to see how the late Duke could have purported to assume or confer British titles on himself and his family except insofar as they had been conferred and not revoked by the British Sovereign

[gorgo...@gmail.com]

Perhaps, "except those titles already granted and remaining unrevoked" means that titles should be "actively" granted like in Prince Philip or a Aga Khan's cases.

[BREMENMURRAY]

It is now well over six years since a non royal Dukedom changed hands.Something of a record in at least the last two hundred years

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Here are the 2025 ages of the 30 dukes (including York and Edinburgh), youngest to oldest (per WIkipedia):

Westminister                       34

Sussex                                 41

Cornwall, Rothesay &

           Cambridge                43

Roxburghe                           44

Grafton                                 47

Hamilton & Brandon          47

Argyll                                    57

Edinburgh  (life peer)         61

Manchester                         62

Bedford                                63

Fife                                       64

Atholl                                    65

York (removed from the

                 rolls)                    65

Rutland                                66

Norfolk                                69

Northumberland                69

Marlborough                      70

Richmond & Gordon         70

Buccleuch &

             Queensberry         71

Somerset                            72

Beaufort                              73

Leinster                               77

Wellington                           80

Devonshire                          81

Gloucester                           81

Sutherland                           85

St. Albans                            86

Kent                                      90

Montrose                             90

Abercorn                              91

Only  8 of them are over 80, and of those 8, just over half are 85.

All things considered, it doesn't seem to be a huge elderly population for life in 2025.

Brooke