Thanks for answering a question I never thought of! Honestly though, are we STILL at the point of "heirs male" that Edward VI, as emphatic as he was about it, eventually gave up on 500 years ago?!?! I wouldn't actually want a title, but that's not the point!
I'm afraid we are :-). The truth is, so few people know about it that there's no public outcry. And frankly, because if affects just a few hundred families, I can imagine that it would be difficult to justify the Parliamentary time needed to change it. But it could be changed for future title creations (though no one outside the Royal family has been given a hereditary title since 1990).
@@royalhistorygeeks6034 Yeah, it's hardly an important social issue! It's just a glaringly obvious example of institutionalised sexism if you _do_ know about it.
@liza martin You answered your own question: cos they _only_ changed the rules of succession to the throne. It doesn't have anything to do with peerage titles; that's a separate thing, & I agree with @Royal History Geeks that it won't happen, for the reasons he listed.
@liza martin Cos they're different things, even tho they're similar. It's sorta like, why don't changes to the bus service affect the train service? If you mean why didn't they change both systems at once, then what Gareth said- nobody's really bothered. It _is_ ridiculous tho.
I suppose in as much as it was ever appropriate to call her the duchess of Edinburgh it would now be appropriate to call her dowager duchess. But of course, no one ever does and it is never included in a list of her full titles and styles.
I would just remind you that if in the creation of the peerage it is stated that the title can go to female descendents, they can. So at times a title can be inherited by women.
Yes it’s all about what it says in the patent. But they always say “heirs make of the body.” There are basically three exceptions from what I can tell: 1) peers of the first creation with no son can ask for it to pass to a daughter for one generation 2) the oldest titles, which we have no patent for can be inherited by a woman provided she is an only child. If she has sisters, the title is divided between them and falls into abeyance. 3) some Scottish titles created before 1707.
@liza martin that’s the way primogeniture works. It is of course outdated, but it stems from the medieval age. If it affected more than a tiny handful of people, it would be changed. At the moment though, it would be difficult for Parliament to change it when it effects almost no one. Hardly a priority over health, education etc As you will know, the rule of succession to the crown have now been changed.
@liza martin I’m not sure but I imagine it would be quite complicated legislation. If not careful it could affect quite a lot of retrospective change etc. I’m sure it’s possible to craft the right legislation but perhaps quite time consuming. Don’t forget that changing the rules of succession for the crown was an international act which involved 16 countries. They wouldn’t care about British peerages so it couldn’t really have been the same act. Also, it would require separate acts in England and Scotland. I really can’t see the SNP government prioritising this any time soon. To be honest, no government would (and they probably shouldn’t given other priorities).
