Talk:Duke of Richmond

Untitled
Why are they all called Charles? &mdash;Ashley Y 09:27, May 14, 2004 (UTC)

Some noble families tend to reuse traditional family names. In this case, it probably has to do with the first Duke being an illegitimate son of King Charles II. The only Duke of the current line not called Charles (the 9th Duke) was not the eldest son, and so wasn't expected to inherit the title. His elder brother, Charles, died of wounds received in World War I. (There had been another even older son, also Charles, who died as a baby.) Proteus (Talk) 09:35, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

I've moved all the earlier Dukes of the current creation over to just "Duke of Richmond" rather than "Duke of Richmond and Lennox", since they were always known simply as the "Duke of Richmond," rather than as the "Duke of Richmond and Lennox." I hope this is (this time) non-controversial. john k 05:25, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Does anyone know why the Duke of Richmond and Lennox gained the title of the UK Duke in 1876? If I understand correctly, it changed nothing (with respect to the precedence). Mapple 18:39, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The Dukedom of Gordon became extinct but the lands associated with the title went to his sister who married the 4th Duke of Richmond. Their son was created Duke of Gordon to continue the association with the family and titles.Alci12 13:37, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Black Hair
This might sound somewhat irrelevant, but from whom did the children of the 2nd Duke of Richmond inherit their black hair? The --Anglius 21:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

The Dukes and Richmond itself
Have any of the title holders since the raise to duke ever actually had anything to do with Richmond in Yorkshire or Surrey? Does the cutoff for their presence and personal say of what goes on in Richmond begin with the Lancastrians? Is Richmond perpetually held by associates of the Royal Family, legitimate or otherwise? What was Richmond's stance on the Pilgrimage of Grace, or the Northern Rebellion/Rising of the North? Have any of the dukes been Jacobites, as they were Cavaliers? It is said that Cavalier Richmond was taken by the Covenanters, which the inhabitants hated so much they raised a tower commemorating the victory of Cumberland in Richmond. Was the Duke of Richmond Whig in opposition to the Hanoverians, but Tory in respect to their own Stuart relatives? Essentially, what became of Richmond's identity and image since it was no longer a quasi-part of Brittany? Richmond is independent of Brittany, so has it been a mere appanage of Royal dynasties? Is Richmond just a clone of Brittany? These questions attempt to know the politics of both peer and shire. How come Richmond does not have its own armorial bearings in use by a duke? The last that seems associated with Richmond are the ermines of Brittany. Nobody uses the Tudor rose on their arms for Richmond. It is widely stated that Richmond is depreciated in value & importance. Is Richmond of a Mercian, as opposed to Northumbrian heritage? I have seen some say Richmond is Midlands, rather than of a Border culture. That Edwin of Mercia may have been owner of Gilling, does not explain Scottish raiding or reiving activities in Richmond. IP Address 03:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Question of meaning.
Not to be stupid, but what does this mean: "...he was considered illegitimate and given this title instead"? He wasn't "considered" to be illegitimate; he was illegitimate: He was a bastard. His parents were not married. That is the very definition of illegitimacy. Also, "he was...given this title instead" of what? The crown? Legitimacy? A rattle? Cheers, LindsayHi 07:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Revert
The table has made the article unnecessary long, has removed the full names of the dukes and has added information about children and wives, which belongs to the respective article, so I have removed it. Phoe talk  13:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

arms
This language is so grossly nonstandard that I scarcely know where to begin:


 * On His Grace's coat of arms, the United Kingdom along with a border of Lennox and surmounted escutcheon of Aubigny, are represented in 1st and 4th cantons as Stuart titles, while Clan Gordon (1st Gordon, 2nd Badenoch, 3rd Seton, 4th Fraser--from acquisition of Aboyne lands) is represented in 2nd and 3rd cantons.

The quarters are miscalled "cantons"; the Stuart royal arms (1603–1707) are miscalled the United Kingdom arms (1801–); the second quarter (Lennox) is ignored. Does "border of Lennox" mean red and white with roses? Has such a border ever been used otherwise?


 * The previous Stuart arms for Richmond had the French province of Berry in fat non-egalitarian cantons 1 and 4, Stuart arms bordered by Aubigny (in Berry) in cantons 2 and 3, with a surmounted Lennox escutcheon.

"fat non-egalitarian cantons" forsooth! Presumably this means 'grand quarters'. What's "bordered by Aubigny"?


 * Henry FitzRoy's arms were as follows: 1st and 4th canton borders for Brittany, 2nd and 3rd canton borders for Somerset, centred by the English Royal Arms, surmounted by an escutcheon of Nottingham, with a bar attached to show royal bastardy.

I'm guessing that this means "the royal arms surmounted by a baton sinister and bordered quarterly ermine (Brittany) and compony azure and argent (Somerset), overall an escutcheon of Nottingham" (whatever that is) but can someone confirm? —Tamfang (talk) 19:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * As to the last, yes, that's what it means, according to Rietstap. The baton is argent. The inescutcheon is Quarterly gules and vairy or and vert, overall a lion argent, and on a chief azure a castle between two stags' heads caboshed argent. —Tamfang (talk) 19:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Also, what does this mean? ...the acquisition of the Aboyne lands is represented in the 2nd and 3rd cantons. —Tamfang (talk) 21:18, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I am not 100% certain that "bordure compAny" is a typo for "bordure compOny". I'm only 99.999984% certain. Otherwise I'd have corrected it. Someone who is 100% certain should make the edit if I'm right.74.64.104.99 (talk) 20:16, 4 June 2019 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson

dubious Notes

 * It is thought that Lennox, who was half breton by his mother, was granted the title in partial recognition of the ties of the precedent titles to Brittany, which had most frequently been held by the Duke of Brittany until it was finally returned to the crown of England by Francis II, Duke of Brittany

A link to Earl of Richmond would make this a bit clearer.


 * In breton the maiden name of Charles Lennox's mother are descriptive. "Ker" means place or farm or city and so Kerouaille is meant to designate a region of Brittany near Brest tied to her family. "Pen" means highest, and "Coet" means woods or forests, with "an" usually meaning "the"; thus Penancoët loosely translates to "chief of the woods."

This can go in her article; it doesn't illuminate anything here. —Tamfang (talk) 20:24, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Categorisation of Duke of Richmond and Lennox
I propose to remove the categorisation of the above page as 'Dukedoms in the Peerage of England' and 'Dukedoms in the Peerage of Scotland', and re-categorise it simply as 'Dukedoms'. Duke of Richmond is categorised as the former and Duke of Lennox is categorised as the latter. Categorising Duke of Richmond and Lennox suggests that it is one 'double-barrelled' dukedom, similar to Duke of York and Albany or Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale, which it is not. Alekksandr (talk) 18:18, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Dukes and Earls
If there is no link between the Dukes and Earls of Richmond, (for example, an Earl of Richmond was "promoted" to Duke of Richmond), is there any connexion between the Dukes and Richmond, North Yorkshire?