Talk:Marquess of Queensberry

message: I am confused about how the Marquessate of Queensbery descended.  The current marquess does not seem to be descended from the original marquess at all.  When the marquessate separated from the dukedom, the dukedom descended through a daughter of the 2nd duke, and the marquessate appears to have descended to a male line heir of the 1st earl.  Since the male lines of the 1st marquess had ended, and the marquessate did not have the special remainder to a female line, shouldn't the marquessate have become extinct, and the current marquess be the Earl of Queensberry? Dglenn 15:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Descent of Marquessate 

message: I agree, at least in part, with the above.  This article is either incomplete or in error, or both.  It tells that the title became extinct upon the death of one Francis Douglas in 1893, yet any perusal of the list of Marquesses shows that the title is clearly not extinct since a living man holds it and has a living heir.
Obviously, the title could have been granted to another family or another branch of the Douglas family, but the article leaves us with no clue.  Even so, this seems unlikely since very few hereditary peerages have been created since Victoria's 1901 death.  I believe the only two in the last fifty years (barring Prime Ministerial earldoms, the last one being granted to Harold Macmillian in '84) were two political supporters created viscounts by Baroness Thatcher--but since both men died without heirs, the titles didn't last long.
So it would be very helpful for someone knowledgeable on the subject to clear this up by connecting the dots (as it were...)
As for inheriting thru the female line, this clearly does happen as especially in the Medieval and Early Modern periods, as many nobles held their titles in "right of" the daughter of the previous holder of the peerage.  How common this is now I admit I do not know. PainMan 01:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Incomplete 

message: Does anyone know the origin of the name 'Queensberry'?  I assumed that there was a place called Queensberry somewhere in Scotland, but as far as I can find out there isn't - not now, at least.  Nor is there one with the variant spelling 'Queensbury'.  ('Bury' is an old form of 'burgh' or 'borough', and usually has nothing to do with burying people, though Bury St Edmunds appears to be an exception!)  There is of course a place called Queensferry, but it would be difficult to confuse the two names.
There is a place called Queensbury in Yorkshire, but no obvious reason why a Scottish Marquessate should be named after that, even apart from the different spelling. There is also a small district of North London called Queensbury, but that is a modern invention.
So does the title come from a place in Scotland that no longer exists, or is very obscure, or is there some other explanation?86.180.93.158 (talk) 22:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it comes from Queensberry. "Viscount Drumlanrig" comes from Drumlanrig, and "Lord Douglas of Hawick and Tibbers" presumably from Hawick and Tibber's Castle. Opera hat (talk) 13:50, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of title