The Royal Wedding and the Bank Account

[Geoff]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67 at ...> wrote:
 
Carol:
 > BTW, a great many titles (dukedoms, earldoms, etc.) have been restored after becoming extinct, so it's hardly surprising that the Lancastrian title was restored. I still find it odd that the claimant must be styled Duke of Lancaster regardless of sex. 

Geoff:
It's part of the history of the title.  It was originally created in 1351 for Henry 
of Grosmont, great-grandson of Henry III and became extinct on his death in 
1361.

It was revived the following year for John of Gaunt and passed to his son, Henry Bolingbroke in 1399. In that year, he usurped the crown from Richard II to 
become Henry IV and the Dukedom was merged with the Crown. It was then 
recreated, also in 1399 for his son Henry, Prince of Wales, and was merged 
with the Crown again when he became Henry V in 1413.

It has remained as a title for the monarch, although the Dukedom became 
extinct after Henry VI as the original charter limited it to "heirs male". Originally, 
the crown would pass to the eldest male child but there was an exception 
with Queen Elizabeth I. In the 20th century, George V, the Queen's grandfather
approved the continued use and nowadays, the rule of primogeniture applies 
so that an eldest daughter can become a Queen regnant even with the 
existence of brothers.

Carol:
Does the same apply to any other royal dukedom involving property or is Lancaster a special case because of the Lancastrian (and Yorkist) claims to the throne during the so-called Wars of the Roses? Is there, for example, a present-day Duke of York?

Geoff:
As you can see, the title was not really an outcome of the Wars of the Roses.

To your latter question, yes, there is a Duke of York. It is the title of Prince
Andrew, the Queen's second son.