My interpretation is that he wanted the title to continue in his male-line (just like he wanted his surname to pass on from generation to generation). A life-time peerage does not follow that wish as it will be discontinued after his son dies, while that son does have a male-heir. I am pretty sure he would not have considered that Charles might divert his wish into awarding a life-time peerage instead of the peerage with the traditional male-line inheritance remainder.
That is very much a possibility, I agree, but I don't know if it can be assumed. The late Duke of Edinburgh was admittedly no advocate for gender equality - or he would not have insisted on passing on his surname when Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother never did - but on the other hand he does not seem to have had a rigidly male-line worldview. The surname he insisted on passing on was his mother's, not his father's, and in the accounts that I recall reading, he lobbied for his name to be included alongside with his wife's name, not to completely replace it. The relatives he chose to represent his birth family at his funeral were not related to him in male line.
In any event, the next two monarchs are males in direct line from Prince Philip. If all goes as Charles allegedly plans, whichever senior royal is next granted the dukedom will likely be a male-line descendant of Philip.
The 1999 agreement did not mention the succession to the recreated dukedom of Edinburgh after Prince Edward's death, which implies Prince Philip either never considered the possibility that King Charles would not create it with the standard remainder (in which case it is unclear what his opinion would have been if he had considered it) or else it was not important enough to him to ask his oldest son to promise it.
Can you provide examples of peerages for which the remainder was changed? I am aware of an example in which the same peerage was created twice for the same person to be able to add a different remainder (Duke of Fife) to ensure it could be passed on; however, I am not aware of any changes in an existing peerage. Thanks in advance!
The dukedom of Marlborough's remainder was altered by Act of Parliament in 1706 to include all of the duke's male and female issue in the line of succession.
And it would look very mean to pick on the Kents and Gloucesters. It looks as if royal dukedoms will not be hereditary going forward, tbough.
I hope so, for more than one reason, but I don't think there has been any suggestion up to now that the life peerage approach will be applied to future royal dukedoms.
It might very well be King William who takes the decision, depending on when (if ever) the next royal dukedom is gifted.
I am, however, a bit surprised that only the Gloucester and Kent titles are discussed and not the Sussex title that is also set to continue on as long as there are male-heirs.
Perhaps because it is not yet clear whether the Sussex title will ever pass to a non-royal heir, and/or because the current duke and duchess of Sussex seem highly likely to react poorly to any such moves.
But I agree with you. If something were to be done to guarantee the eventual return of the Gloucester and Kent dukedoms to the Crown, the same should be applied to the Sussex dukedom. It would only be fair, and the dukedom of Sussex does have historical worth of its own, even if it is not comparable to Gloucester and Kent.