The British Nobility thread 1: Ending 2022

[SirGyamfi1]

I know, but as my question as to why the daughters and not the son were called greedy (etc.) was quoted in your post, I assume it was meant as an answer to that question. Have I misunderstood?




The relevant comparison, though, is to their brother Ned Lambton, who received an undivided £12 million inheritance from their father, which is very far from receiving nothing at all.




The same could be said about Ned Lambton. Indeed, it would be even more difficult in his case to justify his demand to keep the full £12 million on the basis of need, compared to his sisters' smaller claims of £1 million.




It seems that even what limited promises their father made, he failed to execute, according to his son-in-law:

“In my hearing, the father promised my wife the second house on the Italian estate; a very lovely house,” recalls Worsthorne. “But then he got dementia and in the end there was nothing left.”​

It is not so much a question of whether the late Earl should have provided for his adult children in his will (on which reasonable people may differ, whether or not they condone sexism), but of whether the late Earl and current Earl were right to insist on everything being provided to the man and nothing to the women.




Apparently yes, given the previous agreement between the siblings:

Before the writ was issued, the sisters thought they had reached an agreement with their brother. Indeed, Lucinda had planned what to do with her share. “She undertook to pay for one of our grandchildren to go to boarding school and put up the money, thinking it was in the bag,” explains Worsthorne. “It was so embarrassing when the [settlement] didn’t go through and she had to tell the school she hadn’t raised the money after all.”​

Neither have his sisters, but I expect what you mean is that Ned's behavior is treated as more acceptable because it is conforming to their late father's written will. Perhaps you are right about the beliefs behind the comments, though I note that one of the quoted posters was much less intense in his comments about a male nobleman who contested his late grandfather's will:

The point was that they received something useful as a house that many are struggling to get and considering that she’s a woman from a family of some considerable means, in the old days if the family was wealthy the woman would receive a dowry but if the family wasn’t so rich she wouldn’t receive much or anything at all. Ned would need the money because he is running the family estate and most aristocrats aren’t rich like in previous centuries and Ned is the only son and head of the family that’s just how it goes. Maybe they should come to some favorable settlement.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The point was that they received something useful as a house that many are struggling to get

However, Lucinda Lambton and her sisters were not being labeled as "greedy" and "odd" in comparison to those struggling to afford a house. They were being labeled as "greedy" and "odd" in comparison to a wealthy, privileged man campaigning to hold onto every penny of a £12 million inheritance for which he has never needed to work, much less struggle.

Some may think it greedy for anyone to file a claim for £1 million while others are struggling to purchase a home. But Ned Lambton and his supporters clearly believe it is greedy only when a woman is the claimant, since Ned is, in their eyes, not greedy for claiming £12 million while others are struggling to afford a house.

and considering that she’s a woman from a family of some considerable means, in the old days if the family was wealthy the woman would receive a dowry but if the family wasn’t so rich she wouldn’t receive much or anything at all.

Indeed, and as women from such families have testified (see the Liza Campbell quote from earlier), the exclusion or near-inclusion of women from inheritances in English families remains more pervasive than many outsiders are aware of.

Ned would need the money because he is running the family estate and most aristocrats aren’t rich like in previous centuries and Ned is the only son and head of the family that’s just how it goes.

The family indeed cannot help the fact that the headship of the family cannot descend to women (that could only be altered by Parliament), and Lucinda and her sisters evidently are accepting of having the bulk of the inheritance settled on their brother.

There doesn't seem to be any basis for concern that £9 million (the amount which would be left to Ned if he accepted the settlement requested by his sisters) would be somehow insufficient to run Ned's estates. Indeed, Lucinda's statement that the preservation of buildings and countryside is very important to her, and Ned's former willingness to settle some money on at least one of his sisters, would point to the estates being financially secure regardless of which party won the court case.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

However, Lucinda Lambton and her sisters were not being labeled as "greedy" and "odd" in comparison to those struggling to afford a house. They were being labeled as "greedy" and "odd" in comparison to a wealthy, privileged man campaigning to hold onto every penny of a £12 million inheritance for which he has never needed to work, much less struggle.

Some may think it greedy for anyone to file a claim for £1 million while others are struggling to purchase a home. But Ned Lambton and his supporters clearly believe it is greedy only when a woman is the claimant, since Ned is, in their eyes, not greedy for claiming £12 million while others are struggling to afford a house.




Indeed, and as women from such families have testified (see the Liza Campbell quote from earlier), the exclusion or near-inclusion of women from inheritances in English families remains more pervasive than many outsiders are aware of.




The family indeed cannot help the fact that the headship of the family cannot descend to women (that could only be altered by Parliament), and Lucinda and her sisters evidently are accepting of having the bulk of the inheritance settled on their brother.

There doesn't seem to be any basis for concern that £9 million (the amount which would be left to Ned if he accepted the settlement requested by his sisters) would be somehow insufficient to run Ned's estates. Indeed, Lucinda's statement that the preservation of buildings and countryside is very important to her, and Ned's former willingness to settle some money on at least one of his sisters, would point to the estates being financially secure regardless of which party won the court case.

My point is that they were lucky to receive something especially when even junior brothers aren’t given anything if they aren’t wealthy. Estates are expensive to run and maintain and 12 million is quite poor for aristocratic standards of wealth but that’s neither here or there. My issue isn’t because she’s a woman so she’s greedy. I feel like there should be court proceedings and this to be settled properly.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

My point is that they were lucky to receive something especially when even junior brothers aren’t given anything if they aren’t wealthy. [...] My issue isn’t because she’s a woman so she’s greedy. I feel like there should be court proceedings and this to be settled properly.

I see, you were discussing the frequency of wills like the late Earl's in the British aristocracy. (Indeed, that is a point which many daughters of peers, including Lady Lucinda, have been making.)

For clarification, my original question and followup posts have been focused on the vilification of the Lambton women as "greedy" by previous posters (not you) while the Lambton men escaped criticism.

Estates are expensive to run and maintain and 12 million is quite poor for aristocratic standards of wealth but that’s neither here or there.

A 2019 London South Bank University study put the average British peer's personal fortune at £16 million, so although below average, the Lambton earls are not penurious even by the standards of the peerage.

Again, I do believe the information on record militates against the possibility of the sisters' share being needed for this particular family's estates, especially as Ned Lambton himself did not seem to set out that argument. But as you said, a court would be in the best position to investigate the details of the specific case and settle the dispute.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

I understand that you were questioning why posters were insinuating them as greedy and I know that you weren't saying that I called the sisters greedy. I was simply stating my own separate view point. Estates are expensive to run because fixing the roof goes in the millions of pounds, not to mention requiring a certain number of staff as well as paying for them. If their father had been serious about giving them money then trusts should have been made around the time they got married, then these court issues wouldn't be happening. but its irrelevant at this point. Hopefully something good can come out of this.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Anyway, but I wonder, if in the "matriarchalic" Royal Houses, like Norway, Sweden etc. the male "heirs", which are the second born there, are discriminated against as well... or if they inherit the same amount of money as their big sisters.

They wont get the castles and all, that is sure.

There is no sexist discrimination against men for the benefit of women in the Norwegian or Swedish monarchies; as with all countries, they remain patriarchal cultures, even if they score at or near the apex in global rankings of gender parity.

A degree of birth order discrimination is inevitable in modern European monarchies where systems using elective monarchy or partitions between the sovereign's sons have been superseded by primogeniture succession to the throne. As you allude to, royal palaces and the like are considered part of the state heritage. It is undesirable to sell and break up royal estates in order to provide for younger sons/daughters.

However, in Norway and Sweden, even female "spares" such as Princess Märtha Louise and Princess Madeleine are included in the royal family's private fortune. Prince Carl Philip, the only current adult male spare in Sweden or Norway, appears for the moment to be richer in property than even the Crown Princess.

Btw The girls here in this thread, which are talked about, they got a good name, good connections and a good education - this is more than the most get.

It appears the late Earl of Durham did not attempt to grant his daughters that much, in contrast to the first-class education he provided for his son.

"Ned, the youngest in the family, has led a colourful life, too. To celebrate his birth – a son after five daughters – an ox was roasted and a bonfire lit on Penshaw Hill in County Durham, formerly part of the family estate. While his parents (his mother Belinda, from whom Lord Lambton never divorced, died in 2003) thought education wasted on his sisters, he went to Eton."​

And nobody talks, like always, about the second, third... follow me... born sons, if there is a first-born male heir. Here in Germany, as soon as they are 18, they are forced by friendly pressure of their loving families to lay down any claims of inheritence they might have had - written down and court battle proof!... - Because the survival of the name and the undivided estate is of outmost importance.

Interesting!

Please correct me, if I am wrong, but you said "written out" of the last will. Now it sounds like they were not included in the first place - that is a difference.

"Written out" was used in Mirabel's question, but I understand she was quoting the Telegraph's phrasing, posted by Lenora. From reading the story, the facts of this specific case seem somewhat complex. The Lambton daughters were apparently left nothing in their father's last will and testament, but Lady Lucinda, at least, believed she she had an informal understanding with her father and brother to receive a small portion of the inheritance. There also seem to be questions about the late Lord Durham's dementia and whether certain parts of the estate are governed by English or Italian law.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

There is no sexist discrimination against men for the benefit of women in the Norwegian or Swedish monarchies; as with all countries, they remain patriarchal cultures, even if they score at or near the apex in global rankings of gender parity.

A degree of birth order discrimination is inevitable in modern European monarchies where systems using elective monarchy or partitions between the sovereign's sons have been superseded by primogeniture succession to the throne. As you allude to, royal palaces and the like are considered part of the state heritage. It is undesirable to sell and break up royal estates in order to provide for younger sons/daughters.

However, in Norway and Sweden, even female "spares" such as Princess Märtha Louise and Princess Madeleine are included in the royal family's private fortune. Prince Carl Philip, the only current adult male spare in Sweden or Norway, appears for the moment to be richer in property than even the Crown Princess.




It appears the late Earl of Durham did not attempt to grant his daughters that much, in contrast to the first-class education he provided for his son.

"Ned, the youngest in the family, has led a colourful life, too. To celebrate his birth – a son after five daughters – an ox was roasted and a bonfire lit on Penshaw Hill in County Durham, formerly part of the family estate. While his parents (his mother Belinda, from whom Lord Lambton never divorced, died in 2003) thought education wasted on his sisters, he went to Eton."​

Interesting!




"Written out" was used in Mirabel's question, but I understand she was quoting the Telegraph's phrasing, posted by Lenora. From reading the story, the facts of this specific case seem somewhat complex. The Lambton daughters were apparently left nothing in their father's last will and testament, but Lady Lucinda, at least, believed she she had an informal understanding with her father and brother to receive a small portion of the inheritance. There also seem to be questions about the late Lord Durham's dementia and whether certain parts of the estate are governed by English or Italian law.

The sisters are or were trying to apply Italian law because Ned is living in Italy on a property bought by his father many years ago.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Has anyone hear read Black Diamonds?

And also donated large sums for the armed forces rehabilitation centre at Stanford Hall (originally bought & gifted by his father).

That said the Westminsters have not paid inheritance tax (death duties as was) since 1953.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...endish-grosvenor-hugh-grosvenor-a7998246.html

The family actually paid the tax, Pimlico was partly sold to pay for it.

They're also the richest members of the nobility. Indeed the only reason they shot up the ranks so quickly to become dukes was because of their colossal rentier wealth. They were not distinguished by any other achievements.

The 1st Duke was a major philanthropist and patron of a number building’s in Chester and to some charities and hospitals, the 2nd Duke although more well-known for being a playboy and for his marriages was also involved in some philanthropy: he donated land around Milbank for housing working class people, his staff were well-paid and he advocated and built flats for working class people. Bendor also received a DSO for a military campaign in Egypt and saved some British officers. The current Duke’s late father was involved in the military and advocated for veterans. Yes granting of the Dukedom wasn’t because of political reasons or for the family’s lack of political finesse like the Cecil family or Cavendish family, but some of the title holders had their own achievements.

 

[Biri]

After thirty five years of marriage the Duke and Duchess of Norfolk have finalised their divorce.

Edward William Fitzalan-Howard, 18th Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal of England [born 2 Dec, 1956], son of the 17th Duke, KG [1915-2002], and the former Ann Mary Teresa Constable-Maxwell [1927-2013], married 27 June, 1987, Georgina Susan Gore [born 30 Jan, 1962], scion of the Earls Temple of Stowe, daughter of John Temple Gore [1931-2018], and his wife the former Serena Margaret Mounsey [died 2015], by whom he had issue, three sons, Henry, Earl of Arundel and Surrey [born 3 Dec, 1987], Lord Thomas [born 14 March, 1992], and Lord Philip [born 14 July, 1996], and two daughters, Lady Rachel [born 10 June, 1989], and Lady Isobelle [born 7 Feb, 1994].

The Duke of Norfolk is now in a relationship with Francesca Vaughan Herbert [nee Bevan, born 1963], former wife of the Hon Harry Herbert [born 2 March, 1959], second son of the 7th Earl of Carnarvon [1924-2001], and daughter of Jonathan Stuart Vaughan Bevan, and his wife the former Victoria Leycester.

Source: Peerage News.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

After thirty five years of marriage the Duke and Duchess of Norfolk have finalised their divorce.

Edward William Fitzalan-Howard, 18th Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal of England [born 2 Dec, 1956], son of the 17th Duke, KG [1915-2002], and the former Ann Mary Teresa Constable-Maxwell [1927-2013], married 27 June, 1987, Georgina Susan Gore [born 30 Jan, 1962], scion of the Earls Temple of Stowe, daughter of John Temple Gore [1931-2018], and his wife the former Serena Margaret Mounsey [died 2015], by whom he had issue, three sons, Henry, Earl of Arundel and Surrey [born 3 Dec, 1987], Lord Thomas [born 14 March, 1992], and Lord Philip [born 14 July, 1996], and two daughters, Lady Rachel [born 10 June, 1989], and Lady Isobelle [born 7 Feb, 1994].

The Duke of Norfolk is now in a relationship with Francesca Vaughan Herbert [nee Bevan, born 1963], former wife of the Hon Harry Herbert [born 2 March, 1959], second son of the 7th Earl of Carnarvon [1924-2001], and daughter of Jonathan Stuart Vaughan Bevan, and his wife the former Victoria Leycester.

Source: Peerage News.

Well that’s messy.

 

[Durham]

Has anyone hear read Black Diamonds?


The family actually paid the tax, Pimlico was partly sold to pay for it.


The 1st Duke was a major philanthropist and patron of a number building’s in Chester and to some charities and hospitals, the 2nd Duke although more well-known for being a playboy and for his marriages was also involved in some philanthropy: he donated land around Milbank for housing working class people, his staff were well-paid and he advocated and built flats for working class people. Bendor also received a DSO for a military campaign in Egypt and saved some British officers. The current Duke’s late father was involved in the military and advocated for veterans. Yes granting of the Dukedom wasn’t because of political reasons or for the family’s lack of political finesse like the Cecil family or Cavendish family, but some of the title holders had their own achievements.

Yes but the point was that they haven't since the death of the 2nd duke. It took them many years to do so of course. I have read somewhere that the sale of Pimlico was not actually needed to pay the death duties but I can't recall where at the moment.

Lots of wealthy people are philanthropic of course & it would be odd if the Grosvenors weren't. The previous duke was certainly generous with time & money.

The Grosvenors got very lucky with that marriage to Mary Davies. Without that they would have been just another Cheshire gentry family. As you say they produced no political leaders or statemen. And no military heroes like Granby, Wellington or Anson.

I haven't read Black Diamonds but I know the family history fairly well. I've been to Wentworth Woodhouse more than once. The ongoing restoration is fantastic. The family continue to occupy another enormous pile called Milton House that you may already know about?

https://www.thedicamillo.com/house/milton-park-milton-hall/

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Yes but the point was that they haven't since the death of the 2nd duke. It took them many years to do so of course. I have read somewhere that the sale of Pimlico was not actually needed to pay the death duties but I can't recall where at the moment.

Lots of wealthy people are philanthropic of course & it would be odd if the Grosvenors weren't. The previous duke was certainly generous with time & money.

The Grosvenors got very lucky with that marriage to Mary Davies. Without that they would have been just another Cheshire gentry family. As you say they produced no political leaders or statemen. And no military heroes like Granby, Wellington or Anson.

I haven't read Black Diamonds but I know the family history fairly well. I've been to Wentworth Woodhouse more than once. The ongoing restoration is fantastic. The family continue to occupy another enormous pile called Milton House that you may already know about?

https://www.thedicamillo.com/house/milton-park-milton-hall/

Pimlico was partly sold for that reason, also they invested heavily in forestry and and agriculture so it reduced the larger amount they would have paid, the Westminster Halo was also sold for death duties. Also the 3rd and 4th Dukes died childless so there wasn’t any death duty to pay and after 1953, the trusts were established for the estate so the family own the estate through the trusts. Yes, they got lucky when Sir Thomas married Mary Davies, but they were already a wealthy family they just became much wealthier and more immersed in London society after the marriage. Their contributions have been minor on the political and military scene, even though Bendor was involved in some military campaigns and the current Dukes father had involvement with veterans. Did you see the thesis on 2nd Duke of Westminster I put up? I’m not defending anyone, just trying to engage like yourself who could be more knowledgeable than myself.

I have read the book and I liked it. The Milton Hall estate belongs to Naylor-Leylands who are descendants of the Fitzwilliam family. Hopefully Wentworth Woodhouse will be looked after will with the Trust managing it.

 

[Durham]

Did you see the thesis on 2nd Duke of Westminster I put up?

Looks interesting. Thank you!

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Looks interesting. Thank you!

There are two of them by two different people, one focuses specifically on Bendor, the other person uses Bendor as an example on how the aristocracy thrives or declined. Please kindly tell me what you think after, I would be very interested in your thoughts.

 

[Marengo]

The British Nobility thread

It's time to close this thread. You can find the new one here.