The Dukes (3 page)

first ten all had the Garter. Today, three dukes are K.G. - Grafton,
Northumberland, and Norfolk.

All dukes have the right to a coronet, on which are eight gold
strawberry leaves, and a cape edged with stoat with black tails. Only
on great State occasions, such as a Coronation, are these items now
removed from the wardrobe, and a few of the dukes don't have them
at all and are obliged to hire them. Even they may retain the favour
of being addressed as "Your Grace", but some prefer to discourage it.
A little boy was introduced to the Duke of Sutherland, whom he
addressed as "Sir", to the consternation of his proud father, who dug
him in the ribs and loudly whispered "Your Grace"; the boy looked
the Duke in the eye and said, "For what we are about to receive may
the Lord make us truly thankful."
⁴

More often than not, while the privileges have been eroded, the
responsibilities for which they were in some way a recompense have
remained. Not that these responsibilities extend to an active involve­ment in governing the country; only Buccleuch, Portland, and
Devonshire have held political office, the first two before they came
to the title. There was a time when almost every duke was in politics;
the Russells (Dukes of Bedford) have had a connection with the
House of Commons for nearly 500 years, and the Cavendishes
(Dukes of Devonshire) have always been political, from a sense of
duty rather than predilection, as a natural return for the privilege of
rank. The last duke to be Prime Minister was Wellington in 1828, but
before him there were the Duke of Portland (1783 and 1807-9), the
Duke of Grafton (11767-70), the Duke of Newcastle (1754-6 and
1757—62) and the Duke of Devonshire for eight months from
November 1756 to July 1757.

The responsibilities that have remained are those of a landowner
towards his tenantry, and towards the house in which he lives, often so
beautiful as to be a national monument but to which the nation pays
no contribution, towards the inheritance of which he is the guardian.
A few have abnegated and abandoned their estate, not without
reason, for they did not ask to be born to such responsibilities, and
undeniably find life easier without them. They prefer to construct
their own future. Most, however, hang on in the face of public
misunderstanding and political prejudice, knowing that some dark
force, as strong as the blood in their veins, commands them to do their
best for the estate which they have been given. They are "men with
few of the average man's opportunities, men who cannot rise but can
only descend in the social scale, men condemned to eternal publicity,
whose private lives are seldom their own. Men who may live only
where their grandfathers have chosen and where the public expects.
Men hamstrung by an inherited amateur status, to whom barely a
profession is open. Men limited by the responsibilities of too large an
income."
⁵
Some, like the Duke of Richmond, have successfully over­come the disadvantage of title by seeking the "average man
's
opportunities" as an average man: he worked on the factory floor to
learn about engineering, then learned business techniques to make his
Goodwood estate self-sufficient, with the result that his experience
transcends all class divisions. Others, like the Duke of Somerset, have
managed somehow to live a private life in a small country house
without anyone appearing to realise that he exists.

Many dukes, however, like Sebastian in
The Edwardians,
have
simply to face the limitations of their position : "Sebastian, condemned
by the very circumstance of his situation to be nothing more, ever,
than a commonplace young man; as commonplace as a king; for even
his rebellions, were he to rebel, must be on ordained lines; there was
nothing for him to rebel against, except his own good fortune, and
that was a thing he could never evade ... all these things were tied
on to him like so many tin cans to the tail of a poor cat. With them
went the romance of his whole make-up. Poor Sebastian, condemned
to be romantic; condemned always to be romantically commonplace!
What were the wild oats of such a young man? An inevitable crop,
sown by his bad godmother at his christening. Not sown even by his
own hand, but anticipated on his behalf. Poor Sebastian, his traditions
were not only inherited, they were also prophetic. They stretched both
ways. It was an unfair handicap."
⁸

The large country estate, with the house as its pivot, was (and is)
a peculiarly English affair. In many ways it was a perfect example in
miniature of the welfare state, self-sufficient and self-protecting, with
every member of the "family", from shepherds to carpenters to
kitchen-maids, provided for from cradle to grave. Of course, it was
capricious, depending as it did upon the personality of the Duke at its
centre; should he choose to be mean (the nineteenth-century Duke
of Newcastle springs to mind), the mini-welfare state collapsed. For
the most part, however, people who lived on these estates had their
births, clothes, education, health, weddings and funerals paid for.

Where, anyway, has this handful of families come from? What
makes their status so special? In the first place, there have always been
very few of them. The title of duke is granted the least often. Now
there are twenty-six, but there have been times when there were only
two or three. The most there has been at one time was forty, at the
end of George I's reign, descending to thirty-one by 1930. Two or
three more are likely to be extinct by the end of the century, reducing
the total to twenty-three. There have been none (except royal)
created since 1900, and there are not likely to be any more.

The first dukedom in England was created in 1337, when Edward
III made his son the Black Prince Duke of Cornwall. This is now
hereditary in the heir to the throne. Shortly afterwards the dukedom
of Lancaster was also merged with the throne. The title of duke is not
indigenous in England. In the Roman Empire there had been the
dux,
a leader or general, whence our word derives through the French
due,
which came to us with the Conquest. The Norman kings styled them­selves Dukes of Normandy and Aquitaine in France, and were
understandably jealous of creating a title in England equal in rank
to one of their own. So 270 years had to pass before the first English­man became a duke in 1337, and he was of royal blood. A dukedom
of Suffolk was twice created, in 1448 and 1514, and Richard II
created six dukes in one day, on 29th September 1397, but none
survived two years. The first non-royal duke to last was Norfolk in
1473, followed by Somerset, bestowed by Edward Seymour upon
himself in 1547 in the name of his ward, the infant King Edward VI.
Thereafter, the title was so rarely granted, and so regularly pruned by
beheadings and attainders, that there were no dukes at all in England
for thirty years after the execution of the Duke of Norfolk in 1572
(and no non-royal dukes for even longer).

Dukedoms proliferated in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,
dwindling to a handful of fresh creations in the nineteenth. The oldest
of these is Hamilton, created by Charles I in 1643, and the prize for
quantity must go to Charles II, who created twenty-six dukes,
including five nephews, two mistresses, and six bastard sons as well as
the unrelated Duke of Beaufort. Five of his creations survive. Of the
others which continue today, William and Mary are responsible for
Bedford (1694), Devonshire (1694) and Argyll (1701). Queen
Anne created Marlborough (1702), Rutland (1703), Atholl (1703),
Montrose (1707), Roxburghe (1707), and Brandon (1711);
George I created Portland (1716) and Manchester (1719); George
II, Newcastle (1756). The Dukes of Northumberland and Leinster
were both created in 1766 by George III, who honoured Wellington
in 1814. William IV created only one duke, Sutherland in 1833,
while Queen Victoria introduced four new creations, Abercorn
(1868), Westminster (1874), Gordon (11876) and Fife (1889), plus
two duplications in Argyll (1892) and Fife again (1900). It is
common knowledge that Winston Churchill was offered a dukedom
by the present Queen, but respectfully declined.

In all, less than 500 individuals have had the right to call them­selves Duke (or
suo jure
Duchess) in the 651 years since the first
creation.
⁷

The titles chosen do not always bear a close relation to the county
or town where the grantee lives or holds land. The Duke of Devon­shire, for example, has no landholding in Devon, but 72,000 acres in
Derbyshire. The Duke of Norfolk has property in Sheffield and land
in Sussex and Yorkshire, but precious little in Norfolk. The Duke of
Richmond's land is in Sussex, and the Duke of Rutland's in
Nottinghamshire. The Duke of St Albans had nothing to do with the
town of that name, and the Duke of Sutherland owns not an acre in
that county. The Duke of Manchester has hardly been near
Manchester. On the other hand, the Dukes of Northumberland,
Bedford, Argyll, Atholl, Roxburghe, are all firmly seated in the
counties from which they take their titles, and Westminster in the
City which his ancestors made so elegant.

Further complications arise when you consider that there is not
one
peerage system into which these twenty-six individuals fit, but
five.
There used to be just three separate peerages - of England, of
Scotland, and of Ireland - until the union of England and Scotland
in 1707, forming Great Britain and establishing peers of that new
entity, and then the union of Great Britain and Ireland, forming the
United Kingdom in 1801, giving us a fifth peerage. It may help to
have a list showing how the dukes divide :