Talk:Currie baronets

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage.

I have removed the presumed claim of Alick Bradley Currie to the title of 6th Baronet, as a check shows that that there were about eight male lines and an estimated 30 male contenders with prior claims. The Peerage, Person page 22276 shows:

Alick Bradley Currie (1904 – 1987) was the second child and eldest son of
George Hugh Currie (1873 – 1951), who was the 7th child and 3rd son by his second marriage of
Robert George Currie (1835 – 1872), who was 5th son by his second marriage of Sir Frederick Currie, 1st Baronet.

This would explain why, even if he had tried, Alick Bradley would not successfully have proven succession. Apuldram (talk) 16:10, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the presumed line has returned with this edit; given the arguments above, suggest deleting. Klbrain (talk) 03:58, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

merge proposal

Mordaunt Currie to here. Mordaunt not notable, but info could be useful here. Boleyn (talk) 12:07, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose; published author (book of poetry), lyricist for several works, and baronetcy probably gives him enough notability to have a page, although none would be sufficiently by themselves. Klbrain (talk) 03:51, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing, given lack of support. Klbrain (talk) 21:10, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alick Bradley Currie

Just for the record, an attempt at establishing Alick Bradley Currie's claim to the baronetcy based upon published sources available; the below may appear repetitive, but I wanted to try and be as methodical as possible! That notwithstanding, I recognise we're all human and thus I fully accept I may have erred somewhere, in which case, do please let me know.

Based on the information provided in Burke's Peerage, Baronetage and Knightage 2003 (the primary source for the 'thepeerage.com' link above, against which I have also checked this information in an attempt to be as thorough as possible), Alick Bradley Currie was the 6th baronet by virtue of the fact that all those senior to him either died without issue or predeceased him.

At the death of the 5th baronet in 1978:

Alick Bradley Currie's father, George Hugh Currie, had died in 1951. George Hugh Currie's elder half-brother by the first marriage of his father Robert George Currie, Robert Alexander Currie, had died in 1939, leaving no issue per Burke's 2003. George Hugh Currie's elder brother by his father's second marriage, Alick Charles Currie, had died in 1953, leaving no issue per Burke's 2003.

All the descendants of Robert George Currie's four elder half-brothers (sons of the 1st baronet by his first wife) had died, those lines being extinct per Burke's 2003:

The eldest son, Sir Frederick Larkins Currie, 2nd baronet, was father of the 3rd and 4th baronets, the 3rd baronet dying unmarried, and the 4th baronet being father of the 5th baronet. Although the 2nd baronet had three younger sons (the eldest of the three, Percy George Colin Currie, having a son, Frederick Charles Colin Currie, who died without issue in 1922), all of these lines were extinct by 1937 per Burke's 2003. On the death of the 5th baronet, therefore, it was necessary to locate the heir from amongst other descendants of the 1st baronet, as above.

The second son, Maj. Mark Edward Currie, died in 1868 having had a son, Frederick Alexander Currie, who died in 1902, and whose son Ryves Alexander Mark Currie died in 1920, leaving no issue per Burke's 2003. This line was therefore extinct by the time of the death of the 5th baronet, upon whose death, therefore, it was necessary to locate the heir from amongst other descendants of the 1st baronet.

The third son, William Close Currie, died in 1865, having had four sons; although the eldest son, William John Frederick Currie (d. 1923) had two sons who married, they left no issue per Burke's 2003. The other three sons of William Close Currie are recorded as having married, but left no issue per Burke's 2003. The last of these sons died in 1944, with the latter of W. J. F. Currie's sons dying in 1956. This line was therefore extinct by the time of the death of the 5th baronet, upon whose death, therefore, it was necessary to locate the heir from amongst other descendants of the 1st baronet.

The fourth son, Charles Currie, died in 1878, leaving two sons who married but left no issue per Burke's 2003, and were both dead by 1916. This line was therefore extinct by the time of the death of the 5th baronet, upon whose death, therefore, it was necessary to locate the heir from amongst other descendants of the 1st baronet.

By virtue of the fact that, after the death of the 5th baronet, all (recorded- I am only presenting the information from Burke's 2003, from which it is not impossible details are missing due to family uncertainty regarding births or other factors) issue of the 1st baronet senior to the descendants of Robert George Currie had died, and by virtue of the fact that, as outlined above, George Hugh Currie's elder brothers had left no issue per Burke's 2003, his son Alick Bradley Currie, at least based on the information available, was the heir to the baronetcy in 1978. The lack of details regarding subsequent generations, however, does not assist us in identifying the present baronet, as indicated by the statement in Debrett's 2019: 'Due to conflicting information over the exact dates of the marriages of Donald Mark Currie, who dvp 1994, the el son of the 7th baronet, it is not clear who is the rightful heir to the baronetcy.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.125.55 (talk) 19:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]