George is called Master George and one day will be Lord Grantham. So if Robert is still living once George reaches adulthood, what is George's title? There can't be two L. Granthams, can there??
As for the girls. We can assume Marigold will be a Lady since Edith married a Lord. But what about Sibby. Does she inherit the title of Lady?? Her mother was a Lady but her father had no title.
George would probably receive Robert's secondary Title, when he comes of age.
According to the wiki, Robert was known as "Viscount Downton" when he was a child and young man.
I think that Sybbie and Marigold would probably be "Honourables". through their mothers.
Except in very special cases, in 1925 these courtesy titles came from the father's side. They would both be known as Miss _______. Henry and Mary's children will inherit no titles; Bertie and Edith's will be Lord John or Lady Jane Pelham--except for the first boy, who gets the Hexham titles. reply share
George will not have any secondary titles to use until Robert dies, because he is not Robert's son.
As long as Robert is alive, Robert still has the potential of having a son of his own (however unlikely as that is). The heir who uses the family's secondary title was always the direct son of the holder of the title. Even if the earl has no sons and the heir is his nephew, that nephew will never use the secondary title and still be known as plain Mr. XXX until his uncle dies and he inherits the earldom.
Thus until Robert dies, George will be plain Mr. Crawley.
George's earldom will not have come directly from Robert, but through (the now dead) Matthew. If Matthew had not died, once Robert passed away and Matthew became Earl of Grantham, then George would have become Viscount Downton.
As regards Sybil and Marigold, both have no titles and will never have one unless they marry one.
Edith's children with Bertie, however, will have titles. All of them. The oldest son will have the Hexham's secondary title (likely an earldom, but possibly a viscount), while all younger sons will be "Lord Robert, Lord George" etc, and all daughters will be "Lady Mary, Lady Cora" etc. This is because all younger sons of marquesses are allowed to use the honorific "Lord" in front of their Christian name, and ditto with daughters (with earls, while the rule was same for daughters, younger sons had to make do with "honourable" with no titles, in other words, when George inherits the earldom and has several sons, the oldest son becomes Viscount Downton, while the younger sons are "the Honourable Matthew Crawley" etc).
I started to feel sad for Marigold for a moment for being the only 'Miss' among her Lord and Lady siblings but then I remembered that she will more independently wealthy than any of them and have more freedom than the heir!
To you, Baldrick, the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?
George will not have any secondary titles to use until Robert dies, because he is not Robert's son.
As long as Robert is alive, Robert still has the potential of having a son of his own (however unlikely as that is). The heir who uses the family's secondary title was always the direct son of the holder of the title. Even if the earl has no sons and the heir is his nephew, that nephew will never use the secondary title and still be known as plain Mr. XXX until his uncle dies and he inherits the earldom.
Thus until Robert dies, George will be plain Mr. Crawley.
I thought it was in Robert's discretion to hand out the secondary title. And if JF wanted to do it, he could have Alastair Bruce come up with some exception--make it an Austrian title? As Tom would say, There's no logic to it! reply share
Robert has no discretion in handing out secondary titles (I believe this is possible in the Spanish peerage, but definitely not in the British peerage). The title itself always belongs to Robert, who is both Earl of Grantham and Viscount Downton. It's social convention that allows the oldest son of the earl to use the secondary title.
There may be one circumstance where someone other than the oldest son could use the secondary title and that would be the oldest son's oldest son, if the oldest son no longer lived. That grandson would indisputably be the heir to his grandfather (for if the grandfather had another son that boy would not disrupt the line of inheritance for there was already an oldest son and he had surviving male heirs). In that circumstance it may be possible that the grandson could use the secondary title in lieu of his now dead father. There's a logic to it. But I can't confirm this.