PDA

View Full Version : English Nobility



MarkEsq
06-20-2008, 09:02 PM
Double-check my characters for me.

MC: Hartley Hare, aka Lord Hare, aka the future nineteenth Earl of Cottenham

His father: Anthony Hare, aka Lord Hare, the eighteenth Earl of Cottenham.

Anything inconsistent in those designations?! (i.e. being a Lord and an Earl, or anything other combination).

DeleyanLee
06-20-2008, 09:12 PM
Actually, the earl would be Lord Cottenham, not Lord Hare.

Reference: http://members.shaw.ca/jobev/title.html

Mr Flibble
06-20-2008, 09:17 PM
Deleyan is correct.

Also, it's more than possible to be both.
The Duke of Westminster is also the Marquess of Westminster and the Earl of Grosvenor

As the eldest son, Hartley would be addressed with a courtesy title ( usually the highest of his father's lesser titles, if any, would be traditional to teh family, so the Duke of Westminster's eldest son is the Earl Grosvenor) so possibly Viscount of somewhere, or Lord of somewhere else. If no lesser titles, (and for younger sons) he would be the Honourable Hartley Hare.

MarkEsq
06-20-2008, 09:34 PM
Deleyan is correct.

Also, it's more than possible to be both.
The Duke of Westminster is also the Marquess of Westminster and the Earl of Grosvenor

As the eldest son, Hartley would be addressed with a courtesy title ( usually the highest of his father's lesser titles, if any, would be traditional to teh family, so the Duke of Westminster's eldest son is the Earl Grosvenor) so possibly Viscount of somewhere, or Lord of somewhere else. If no lesser titles, (and for younger sons) he would be the Honourable Hartley Hare.


Okay, so if I understand, my format could be correct. That is, if the father is both the Earl of Cottenham and Lord Hare, his son would be Lord Hare also (it being the lesser of his father's titles). Is that right?!

Mr Flibble
06-20-2008, 09:39 PM
Actually Lord is not a peerage, it's a form of address ( although I think Baron can also be Lord, not sure on that) or a collective noun of peers. So he is not Lord Hare, he is Lord Cottenham (the Earl of Cottenham). One peerage. With the Lord equivilent to Mr.

Basically you have, in descending order, Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount and Baron (/Lord??) Each is addressed as Lord [insert place he is earl / duke of]

For example if Hartley's courtesy title was Viscount Turnip, he would be addressed as Lord Turnip in conversation, not Lord Hare. But post would be addressed to Viscount Turnip.

MarkEsq
06-20-2008, 09:47 PM
Actually Lord is not a peerage, it's a form of address ( although I think Baron can also be Lord, not sure on that) or a collective noun of peers. So he is not Lord Hare, he is Lord Cottenham (the Earl of Cottenham). One peerage. With the Lord equivilent to Mr.

Basically you have, in descending order, Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount and Baron (/Lord??) Each is addressed as Lord [insert place he is earl / duke of]

For example if Hartley's courtesy title was Viscount Turnip, he would be addressed as Lord Turnip in conversation, not Lord Hare. But post would be addressed to Viscount Turnip.

Okay, so his name is Hartley Hare, his title is "Viscount" and he is addressed as "Lord Cottenham." Do I have it now?

IceCreamEmpress
06-20-2008, 10:21 PM
Wait, no. His father is the Earl of Cottenham, but he's not the Viscount Cottenham; he'd be the Viscount of somewhere else.

For instance, Princess Diana's brother, Charles Spencer, the 9th Earl Spencer, was Viscount Althorp before his succession to the earldom.

Now the Spencers are unusual in that their family name is the name of the earldom, and the name of their family seat, Althorp, is the name of the viscounty.

Your folks might be more like the Earls of Shaftesbury; the family surname is Ashley-Cooper, and the subsidiary titles are the baronies of Ashley and Cooper, so the heir to the earldom is styled "Lord Ashley." I'd go for that: dad's the Earl of Cottenham, and Hartley is Baron Hare, called "Lord Hare."

dpaterso
06-20-2008, 10:49 PM
Yup, good advice all. Alas I've nothing to add, but the minefield of British nobility titles and forms of address always makes me chuckle. You have to know who's related to whom, since the names don't seem to be related at all. Adding to the confusion, those entitled to use "Lord" may might prefer to be known simply by their estate (e.g. Cottenham) since there is no other in the land entitled to that name. :eek:

I'm just saying, Hartley Hare makes me think of Kenneth Grahame and Beatrix Potter animal characters, but maybe that's intentional.

-Derek

MarkEsq
06-20-2008, 11:19 PM
Wait, no. His father is the Earl of Cottenham, but he's not the Viscount Cottenham; he'd be the Viscount of somewhere else.

For instance, Princess Diana's brother, Charles Spencer, the 9th Earl Spencer, was Viscount Althorp before his succession to the earldom.

Now the Spencers are unusual in that their family name is the name of the earldom, and the name of their family seat, Althorp, is the name of the viscounty.

Your folks might be more like the Earls of Shaftesbury; the family surname is Ashley-Cooper, and the subsidiary titles are the baronies of Ashley and Cooper, so the heir to the earldom is styled "Lord Ashley." I'd go for that: dad's the Earl of Cottenham, and Hartley is Baron Hare, called "Lord Hare."

Bloody hell. So Hartley Hare would be a Viscount, but called Lord Hare. Whereas his dad would be Lord Cottenham. Now do I have it?!

(And thanks all!)

IceCreamEmpress
06-20-2008, 11:59 PM
No, he wouldn't necessarily be a viscount at all. Not every family with an earldom also holds a viscounty; some (like the earldom of Shaftesbury) have baronies as subsidiary titles.

If he were a viscount, he'd be Viscount {Placename} or the Viscount of {Placename}, depending on usage (mostly Viscounts "of" somewhere are of somewhere in Scotland). But he'd be styled "Viscount Whatever", not "Lord Whatever" even though he'd be addressed as "Lord Whatever".

Let me give an example:

"Ms. Smith, let me introduce David Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley."
"Delighted to meet you, Lord Linley."

Of course Linley is an odd case, because he actually uses his title as his professional name, so many people know him as "David Linley"...



In any case, here are the key elements:

A) What is the family's surname? (The Earl of Snowdon's family surname is Armstrong-Jones; the Earl Spencer's family surname is Spencer; the Earl of Shaftesbury's family surname is Ashley-Cooper; and so on.)

B) What are the subsidiary titles? (An earldom usually has a viscounty and/or a barony or baronies as subsidiary titles.)


So if the father is Henry Hare, Earl of Cottenham (who'd be addressed as "Lord Cottenham"), then his eldest son might be styled as follows: Hartley Hare, Viscount Hare (if there's a viscounty of Hare); Hartley Hare, Viscount Somewhereelse (if the viscounty is attached to a place); Hartley Baron Hare (if there's a barony of Hare); or Hartley Hare, Baron Somewhereelse (if there's a barony attached to another place).

Whether he's Viscount Hare or Baron Hare, he'd be addressed as "Lord Hare"; if he was Viscount Somewhereelse or Baron Somewhereelse, he'd be addressed as "Lord Somewhereelse".


He'd certainly NOT be "Viscount Cottenham" because an earldom and a viscounty are almost never the same.

Mr Flibble
06-21-2008, 12:07 AM
Bloody hell. So Hartley Hare would be a Viscount, but called Lord Hare. Whereas his dad would be Lord Cottenham. Now do I have it?!

(And thanks all!)

As ICE says.

Lord is like 'Your Highness'. It shows the rank of the person your are talking to / about ( Lord is a peer, Highness is a royal), not their actual name OR title as such. ie, you'd say 'pleased to meet you, your Highness' 'not 'how do there Prince Chuck.'

Lord Lucan was the Earl of Lucan, but his given name was Patrick Bingham.

Anyway poor old Hartley's not Lord Hare, unless he is Viscount of Hare. He's Lord [placename].

Simple eh?

dpaterso
06-21-2008, 12:17 AM
(As you probably know.) Expect the usual forms of address by servants, e.g. your lordship or m'lord. Would your lordship prefer tea out on the balcony or in the gazebo? Beg pardon, m'lord, a telephone call for you, it's your tailor.

-Derek

MarkEsq
06-21-2008, 03:23 AM
(As you probably know.) Expect the usual forms of address by servants, e.g. your lordship or m'lord. Would your lordship prefer tea out on the balcony or in the gazebo? Beg pardon, m'lord, a telephone call for you, it's your tailor.

-Derek

Now, would those be capitalized? M'Lord, or m'lord, or M'lord...?

Priene
06-21-2008, 01:56 PM
The correct way to address these people is to put their titles in quotation marks.

So we get "Lord" Archer, "Sir" Alan Sugar and "Queen" Elizabeth Windsor.

Keyan
06-21-2008, 02:09 PM
???

dpaterso
06-21-2008, 03:12 PM
Now, would those be capitalized? M'Lord, or m'lord, or M'lord...?
Lowercase, much the same as "Yes sir, thank you sir" would be lowercase, unless it starts a sentence.


The correct way to address these people is to put their titles in quotation marks.
So we get "Lord" Archer, "Sir" Alan Sugar and "Queen" Elizabeth Windsor.
Goodness, that just looks wrong. Our guest speaker today will be bestselling author, Lord Archer. Multimillionaire business exec Sir Alan Sugar is renowned for his plain-speaking, no-nonsense attitude. Her Majesty the Queen looks resplendent today in a pink jacket with matching hat and handbag.

-Derek

HeronW
06-21-2008, 03:12 PM
Hartley Hare--as a name could lead to the less than flattering Har-Har as a nickname.

Darklite
06-21-2008, 03:31 PM
I remember Hartley Hare as a moth-eaten puppet from 70s children’s TV programme Pipkins- I pity any bloke lumbered with the name :D

http://www.thechestnut.com/pipkins.htm

dpaterso
06-21-2008, 03:42 PM
Thanks for the link, I had a good laugh. :)

-Derek

Mr Flibble
06-21-2008, 06:06 PM
The correct way to address these people is to put their titles in quotation marks.

So we get "Lord" Archer, "Sir" Alan Sugar and "Queen" Elizabeth Windsor.

While everyone knows Jeffery Archer as Lord Archer, that is not his title -- he is not a Lord other than as part of teh collective noun for peers. His title is in fact Baron of Weston-Super-Mare, and formally he would be known as Lord Weston-Super-Mare. He's known as Lord Archer only as it's not a heredity title, and the papers didn't want to confuse everyone by calling him that, as everyone knew him as just Jeffery Archer before.


And you don't say Queen Elizabeth Windsor. Her Majesty the Queen, or Her majesty Queen Elizaebth II. If you actually spoke to her, it's Your Majesty to start, and then Ma'am.

Sir Alan Sugar is right as an address. Although of course, sir isn't his title. You call him sir because he is a Knight, which is his rank.

Sir, and Lord are forms of address not titles. Queen is not a form of address.

dpaterso
06-21-2008, 08:01 PM
While everyone knows Jeffery Archer as Lord Archer, that is not his title -- he is not a Lord other than as part of teh collective noun for peers. His title is in fact Baron of Weston-Super-Mare, and formally he would be known as Lord Weston-Super-Mare. He's known as Lord Archer only as it's not a heredity title, and the papers didn't want to confuse everyone by calling him that, as everyone knew him as just Jeffery Archer before.
Spot on. :) But dear Jeremy is rather like Lady Sarah Ferguson (technically ex-Duchess of York) in that he doesn't actually stop people from thinking he's Lord Archer, descended from a long line of toffs.

Further off-topic I know, but reading about JA's adventures is a source of much hilarity. The stories and articles paint a portrait that's so bizarre it's hard to believe:

In May 1991, Archer organised a charity pop concert in aid of the Kurds of Iraq, starring Rod Stewart, Paul Simon, Sting and Gloria Estefan, who all performed for free. On June 19, 1991, Jeffrey Archer held up a cheque for £57,042,000
...
In 1992 the Kurdish Disaster Fund wrote to Mr Archer, complaining: "You must be concerned that the Kurdish refugees have seen hardly any of the huge sums raised in the west in their name"
...
Archer then went to Iraq on a fact-finding mission, where his chant of "Long Live Kurdistan" was unfortunately mis-translated as "Bastard, Devilish Kurdistan."
~http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Archer

-Derek

Mr Flibble
06-21-2008, 08:36 PM
Spot on. :) But dear Jeremy is rather like Lady Sarah Ferguson (technically ex-Duchess of York) in that he doesn't actually stop people from thinking he's Lord Archer, descended from a long line of toffs.

One suspects that among the upper classes he's referred to as 'that awful Archer fella.'

Brown envelope stuffed with cash anyone?

Penguin Queen
06-22-2008, 02:20 PM
Her Majesty the Queen looks resplendent today in a pink jacket with matching hat and handbag.

-Derek

...but no skirt? :D

Keyan
06-22-2008, 09:43 PM
Further off-topic I know, but reading about JA's adventures is a source of much hilarity. The stories and articles paint a portrait that's so bizarre it's hard to believe:

~http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Archer

-Derek

Clearly an archetypal Colorful Character. Jeffrey Archer and the Kurdish Adventure. Jeffrey Archer and the People of Immingham. Jeffrey Archer and the Improbable Tart.

And so on.