I notice that England (and undoubtedly Scotland and anyplace else that is part
of the Crown's control) has a whole passle of what I'd call "peers" (people
with noble titles).
Glancing through the list of Canadian Governor Generals alone shows me
Viscount Monck Lord Lisgar Earl of Dufferin
Duke of Argyll/Marquess of Lorne
Marquess of Landsdowne Lord Stanley Earl of Aberdeen Earl of Minto Earl Grey
HRH Duke of Connaught Duke of Devonshire Lord Byng Viscount Willingdon Earl of
Bessborough Lord Tweedsmuir Earl of Athlone Viscount Alexander
Now, did all these people hold a hereditary peerage? Would they all have some
form or fief associated with the peerage? Or merely a title, sans lands? I'm
asking this while I'm thinking about the form of the NAC in 2183 and how the
House of Lords will look.
I'm fairly certain the House of Representatives and the House of Commons can
be considered to have fallen into some sort of General Assembly for the
Confederation. But what about the Lords? Would peerages be created on the new
worlds? Would colonies all fall under some sort of peerage? (this would
reinvigorate the peerage and probably work well for the NAC
royals/peers and for the Romanovs) Would we
see the Duke of Memphis? The Earl of Niagra? The Marquess of Brooklyn?
And as an aside, how many of these nobles (enfeoffed and unenfeoffed) in
England and Scotland these days? Someone must keep a list.
Is there an online version of such a roll of peers that lists what titles
exist, which ones are currently held, and by whom? And if so, does it
distinguish between titles with land and without? I haven't even the vaguest
idea where to begin a search for such a thing.
And can the Crown arbitrarily create or revive titles and grant lands and
whatnot? Or has this been severely constrained since the coming of the
constitutional part of constitutional monarchy?
Sign me Curious-In-The-Colonies,
> Is there an online version of such a roll of peers
Having had to do research on titles and nobility for the fantasy game I run,
here's a few places to start:
Homepage for the House of Lords:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldhome.htm
A guide to Regency era British nobility:
http://laura.chinet.com/html/titles01.html
Some interesting articles on other nations:
http://www.heraldica.org/intro.htm
There are more of course, but these are the ones that I have bookmarked.
The easiest answer to all you questions is that there is *nothing* like a
clear succinct answer.
> On 13 May 2001, at 23:07, Thomas Barclay wrote:
> I notice that England (and undoubtedly Scotland and anyplace else
These are all temporal peers. The House of Lords also contains spiritual
peers - the two archbishops and 24 of the bishops from the church of
england. But let's ignore the bishops and concentrate of the lords temporal.
Might as well put the various British noble titles in pecking order:
Duke/Duchess
Marquess/Marchioness
Earl/Countess
Viscount/Viscountess
Baron/Baroness
(NB Scotland has some differences from England and Wales and for the sake of
simplicity, and my ignorance, I'm excluding it from the following.)
There are also baronets, which are hereditary but which are not peers (and
hence never had a seat in the House of Lords).
> Now, did all these people hold a hereditary peerage?
In the UK there are two sorts of peers. Hereditary peers and life peers. Life
peerages were invented in 1958 are normally given to individuals for service
to the country (or the governing political party) and hence most life peers
tend to be middle aged or older. I would guess that most if not all of the
people on your list were in fact hereditary peers.
Hereditary peers are adressed as The Title of yyyy. Life peers are addressed
as The Lord xxxx of yyyy or The Baroness xxxx of yyyy (to distinguish a female
life peer from the wife of a peer). Where xxxx is the surname and yyyy the
placename. All life peers are
Barons/Baronesses
> Would they all have some form or fief associated with the peerage?
All peerages, including life peerages, include a placename in their full
title. But the placename doesn't convey any sense of possession.
> I'm asking this while I'm thinking about the form of the NAC in
Well in 1999 almost all the hereditary peers had their voting rights removed.
The House of Lords now consists of 92 hereditary peers, 533 life peers, 28 law
lords and 26 bishops, plus two royal office holders (the Earl Marshal and the
Lord Great Chamberlain).
Further reform of the house of lords is being considered and will probably
happen within ten years.
> I'm fairly certain the House of Representatives and the House of
Agreed.
> But what about the Lords? Would peerages be created on the new
Probably. There were some peerages created in the pre-AWI colonies. And
several british peers have/had titles with the names of foreign places -
battles they had won, colonies they had founded or governed.
So there are probably a whole load of life peerages named after places from
Miami to Tau Ceti. Whether there are any more hereditary peerages and/or
peerages with grants of land is less probable.
> And as an aside, how many of these nobles (enfeoffed and
I got my House of Lords data from
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld/ldhome.htm
Debrett's publishes a peerage that's considered definitive. But it's not
available online - http://www.debretts.co.uk/
The FAQ on British Royal & Noble Families from alt.talk.royalty may be useful
http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/britfaq.html and has more links to other
sites than I can be bothered to look through.
> And can the Crown arbitrarily create or revive titles and grant
The Crown (that wonderfully nebulous entity) can create any title that it
pleases, so long as it isn't held by someone else already. So old titles can
be resurrected or new ones invented. (N.B. Some titles (e.g. Duke of
Edinburgh) are gifts of the monarch and are NOT inherited.)
The Crown can only grant land that it owns. So the Queen could grant land from
the royal estates, and the government could grant land that it owns. But I
have no idea how long it is since that last happened. I don't think that
any post-war peerages have come with grants of land, not even hereditary
peerages.
> Or has this been severely constrained since the coming of the
The unwritten British constitution? Or the NAC constitution?
My girlfriend's writing career includes here working on a 'Regency Young
Romance' *shudder*, so she's done some research on this. Even more interesting
to me was how complicated titles for women could be; some will remember when
'Captain Lady Megan' became 'Captain Dame Megan'.
The rules for whether it was 'Lady Argill' or 'Lady Margaret' caused my eyes
to glaze over.
I'll give the results so far to her, as I assume some may help her, and she
may have further areas to site.
***
Would we see the Duke of Memphis? The Earl of Niagra? The Marquess of
Brooklyn?
***
I seem to recall something of this in the original Starfire naming of some
ships, but I don't think it was ever explained. Either that, or I'm thinking
of Vampire, the Masquerade.
The above mentioned 'bias' towards/against women would probably see SOME
change, at least. As far as govenors of colonies go, I think they tended to be
held by titled men, but the posts weren't titled themselves, so that would
seem to factor in.
In the final, after you get a good hold on the status quo, you can start
thinking about where you want it to go.
The_Beast
-Douglas J. Evans, curmudgeon
One World, one Web, one Program - Microsoft promotional ad
> My girlfriend's writing career includes here working on a 'Regency
IIRC, "Dame" is (or "was") the equivalent of "Sir", thus used to indicate
knighthood, and is used with the Christian name. "Lord Placename" would be a
hereditary title; "Lord Surname of Placename" would be a life peer; and "Lord
Christianname" would be the child of someone who has a hereditary title. Again
IIRC, the military rank comes before the personal title ("Admiral Lord Jones"
rather than "Lord Admiral Jones"), but I think there's an exception, just to
make life difficult.
Yep, glazed over solid. ;->=
Tomb: She's formulating further ideas, but sez there's a Yahoo group called
'peerage' that's very good.
The_Beast
-Douglas J. Evans, curmudgeon
One World, one Web, one Program - Microsoft promotional ad
> On 14 May 2001, at 12:37, laserlight@quixnet.net wrote:
> IIRC, "Dame" is (or "was") the equivalent of "Sir", thus used to
Correct.
> "Lord Placename" would be a hereditary title; "Lord Surname of
Correct.
> and "Lord Christianname" would be the child of someone who has a
Sometimes correct. Generally true for daughters of Counts and higher and
younger sons of Marquesses and higher (Eldest sons normally take their
father's secondary title).
See http://www.richecourt.com/correct_forms_of_address.htm for what was
considered the correct form of addressin 1932. Very complex.
> Again IIRC, the military rank comes before the personal title
Correct. If the officer is knighted then the 'Sir' comes between the rank and
the first name, and the Sir firstname is included where other officers would
just be refered to as Rank surname. e.g. General Sir Peter De La Billiere.
***
Correct. If the officer is knighted then the 'Sir' comes between the rank and
the first name, and the Sir firstname is included where other officers would
just be refered to as Rank surname. e.g. General Sir Peter De La Billiere.
***
Eyes so glazed I can barely see the screen, but if you explained the
exception, rather than just repeated what he said, I missed it.
> ***
Nope. Can't think of an exception, though I'd bet that there is one. Was just
adding the case for knighted officers which were yet another twist.