Foreigners and Titles (correction)

[pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Milz" <absinthe at m...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., "Milz" <absinthe at m...> wrote:
[snip]
> > I'm not too sure of the protocol with other countries, but in
> > the US those individuals who have received orders from the
> > Queen can't use the title "Sir" (at least according to the
> > etiquette mavens). It boils down to that an American citizen
> > is a subject of a foreign sovereign. 

But it is because of British law, not US law, as I understand it.  
The way I've seen it interpreted, is that there is nothing under US 
law to prevent an American from holding a foreign title, and an 
American can thus inherit a hereditary title, without having to give 
up either his/her US citizenship or the title.  What US law does is 
preventing the US government from creating its own titles of nobility 
and knighthood.

A Norwegian citizen awarded a Grand Cross, or a Knight/Dame commander 
cross is no more a "Sir" or "Dame" than an American in the same 
situation, and that has nothing to do with Norwegian law (there is no 
Norwegian law on this subject), it is because foreign citizens are 
not members of the British orders of chivalry in the same sense as 
British subjects are; they are Knights/Dames Extra.  King Olav V of 
Norway thus was a Knight Extra of the Most Ancient And Most Noble 
Order of the Thistle.  

Citizens of Canada, Australia and New Zealand do not receive British 
orders at all, as their governments have requested so.  These 
countries now have their own honour-systems.

> > The same goes for bowing or courtsying (sp?) to a foreign 
> > sovereign.  American citizens aren't supposed too. I remember
> > when the Prince and Princess of Wales paid a state visit here.
> > Several etiquette mavens warned that US citizens do not bow or
> > courtsy to the Royals because bowing or courtsying is a sign
> > of subservience. Since the US is no longer a part of the
> > British Empire and is a sovereign nation itself, US citizens
> > aren't subservient to any foreign goevernments or heads of
> > state. The etiquette mavens advised that when introduced to
> > the Royal couple a handshake was appropriate.

To me this sounds very strange, and if I (a Norwegian citizen) were 
to meet the American president and not bow to him, that would be an 
implied insult directed at both the President as a person and the 
country which he represents. 

Note that when speaking about bowing, I do not mean the 45degree bow 
from the waist up; I am speaking of bowing the head.  

> That's supposed to be "It boils down to that an American citizen is 
> not a subject of a foreign citizen".
> 
> Also, a number of Americans have recieved orders from the Queen, 
> Ronald Reagan being one of them. Again, he isn't supposed to
> use the title "Sir", nor is his wife allowed to call herself
> "Lady Reagan" (and definitely not Lady Nancy Reagan, because
> that implies she's the daughter of a Duke, Marquess, Earl,
> Viscount or Baron)
> 
> Milz (who had a very strict English teacher who insisted upon 
> researching these things for creative writing assignments.)

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at y..., foxmoth at q... wrote:
> 	On a (vaguely) related note, it bugs me when Star Wars
> fiction refers to Lord Darth Vader. Though there's no reason why
> the SW universe can't have its own etiquette, it just sounds
> incorrect to me.  Lord Darth Vader would indicate the son or
> brother of the title holder, I think.  
> Pippin, who learned this from reading Dorothy Sayers and hopes
> she is right

To get on the topic of Lord/Lady and hereditary titles in England and 
in Scotland (the systems are not the same).  The titles, and the 
institution of nobility that these titles form, that until recently 
conferred an automatic right to a seat in to House of Lords, are 
commonly termed peerage.  The persons holding those titles are 
referred to as peers and peeresses.  

Disclaimer:  The following are an amateur's thoughts, and while I do 
not believe I am wrong in any of my opinions, there is always the 
possibility that I have got some facts wrong.  There is a CD-ROM on 
the subject I want dearly, but £40 is a bit much right now.  In a 
couple of months, though....

In England, the peerage refers to the titles of Duke/Duchess, 
Marquess/Marchioness, Earl/Countess, Viscount/Viscountess and 
Baron/Baroness, in descending order of precedence.  In Scotland, 
Baron/Baroness is not a peerage-title, the title equivalent of 
English Baron/Baroness being Lord/Lady of the Parliament.  Scottish 
Barons/Baronesses are a story by themselves, but I'll get back to 
that.  

In general, all peers are Lords/Ladies - not all of their children 
are so; only the oldest child of a peer is a Lord/Lady (he/she will 
by courtesy hold one of the lesser titles of one parent), the other 
children do not inherit titles.  Let us (tongue-in-cheek-ly) 
disregard reality for a moment, and assume that Simon Branford is the 
Duke of Oxford and Marquess of Cambridge, having with his wife Hedwig 
an oldest child named Hermione and a son named Ronald, and that Dai 
Evans is the Earl of Pembroke and Baron of Ebbw, With one son named 
Harry.  

(Disclaimer:  Any similarity between the above and any living person 
is purely coincidental.  No shipping-preference should be inferred 
from any of the above!).

Simon would then be "His Grace, the Duke of Oxford", Hermione would 
be "The Most Honourable Lady Hermione, Marchioness of Cambridge" and 
Ronald would be "The Honourable Ronald Branford".  The Duke may on 
occasion be referred to as "Lord Simon" or "Lord Branford".  Ronald's 
children would not be termed "honourable", or anything else, as they 
would not be children of a peer.  Lady Hermione's children would not 
be termed anything, as they are not formally children of a peer until 
His Grace, the Duke dies.  The Duke's wife would be termed "Her 
Grace, the Duchess of Oxford", barring the event of a divorce.  

Dai would, on his side, be "Lord Dai, Earl of Pembroke", wile Harry 
would be "Lord Harry, Baron of Ebbw".  Dai would sign his letters 
as "Pembroke".

Apart from peerage-titles there are some other hereditary titles in 
Britain, including that of "baronet", "lord/lady of the manor" 
and "feudal baron" (in the baronage of Scotland).  For a very 
complete article on the topic of the two latter titles, see 
http://www.heraldicmedia.com/site/info/manor.html

*   The title baronet is all-British, and as I recall it, it was 
originally created as a fund-raising project for the king (presumably 
named George); you could at the time get such a title for a certain 
amount of money - the sum could even be broken down into several 
smaller down-payments.  Holding the title of baronet allows you the 
prefix Sir/Lady, coupled with the suffix bart./brt., as 
follows:  "Sir Robert Chiltern, bart." and "Lady Mabel Chiltern, 
bart."  AFAIK, there are no rules regarding whether to use "bart." 
or "brt."  The title is hereditary, and may be seen as a form of 
hereditary knighthood.

*   In England, there is also the title "lord/lady of the manor".  
These are the infamous titles that can be sold and bought, and today 
they have rather less meaning than they used to.  I believe the 
decision to allow the sale of such titles was made around 150-200 
years ago, as a measure to allow peers with failing finances an 
opportunity to raise money without separating themselves with 
anything important.  The holding of a lordship of the manor is 
separate from the holding of the manor itself, and can therefore be 
sold separately (so one person can own the manor, while another owns 
the title of lordship of that manor).

The lordships of manors are a form of title deeply rooted in 
feudalism, and the last element of feudalism in England ended around 
1925.  For more complete information see the above website.  

At least one Norwegian holds such a title, one Dr. Sigmund Røkke 
Johnsen.  He may under no circumstance style himself "Lord Newton", 
the correct styling is "Dr. Sigmund Røkke Johnsen, lord of the manor 
Newton", and if he introduces himself in that manner to a real lord, 
said lord would probably think "upstart" in the most derisive manner, 
and attempt to forget him.  If Sigmund Røkke Johnsen attempted to 
introduce himself as Lord Newton, he might in the worst case be 
reported to the police for attempted fraud.

*   Scotland does not have the title "lord/lady of the manor".  The 
titles Baron/Baroness fulfilled the same spot in the hierarchy.  
These titles have had a somewhat different development, however, and 
carry rather more weight and importance in British society.  

Among points of interest, a Scottish baron is permitted two pipers; 
and he is permitted to display a chapeau in his coat of arms, and 
also supporters, a barred helm garnished with gold, a robe and unique 
flags with his coat of arms (note:  I am referring to elements in the 
coat of arms, not actual items (the pipers are real, however)).  
Present style of address is e.g. "Charles Gairdner of Lethendy, Baron 
of Lethendy", and for Baronesses, e.g., "Joan Cranfield Moneypenny of 
Pitmilly, Lady Pitmilly, Baroness of Pitmilly". 

Again, see above-mentioned website for more complete information.

Best regards
Christian Stubø
who is endlessly fascinated by nobility and knighthoods, and yet 
understands the reasons that Norway abolished nobility altogether in 
1824 (we only had two titles of count (on one hand) and one of baron, 
anyway).