The British Nobility thread 1: Ending 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
.

Viscountess Weymouth attended Evgeny Lebvedev's Christmas Party on December 13:


** Pic **
 
Viscountess Weymouth at the Dolce & Gabbana 12 part Alta Moda aria to opera at La Scala in Milano last night


https://scontent-frt3-2.cdninstagra...6&ig_cache_key=MjIwMDMxODU0NTE0NDA1NzYxOA==.2

The marriage took place on Thursday, 19 December, at Mercer Mill Plantation, Georgia, USA, between Mr Remy White Trafelet and Lady Melissa Percy, younger daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Northumberland

Mr R.W. Trafelet and Lady Melissa Percy - Marriages Announcements - Telegraph Announcements

Hi
My great great aunt (I believe) was a housekeeper for the Graf (count) of Grafschaft Gnesen in germany ( now Poland I believe..gniezno?)

The family story is that he married her. His name was switalski (I believe)

The story gets a bit muddled after this..apparently they lost their manor house and property during the war to the Russians...but the german nobility should have been long collapsed by world war 2...maybe he was one of the last survivors?

Anyway, I'm not asking anyone to work on my genealogy, I'd just like to locate this grafshaft (countdown or earldom) of Gnesen and confirm that a Count switalski once owned it and whether or not the house still survives...story is that it took a day to ride around his property on a horse. I'm quite skilled in genealogy but in 20 years I've never found a single reference or picture of this place..

Any advice or hints will be appreciated

Thank you.
Mark

I think it is not the right place for this kind of post. Being a great-great-niece to a count's housekeeper is a really distant relation to nobility, not to mention royalty. ;)


You have so, so little information. And maybe the reason why you, someone "skilled in genealgy" [research], can't find anything more than the family story itself is that essential facts and names are clearly "lost in translation" and generational transfers through two-three generations?



I believe Gnesen in your family story is Gniezno, Poland. The town is actually considered the first historical capital of Poland. It was ruled by the Prussians in 1793–1807 and 1815–1920. There was Landkreis Gnesen, an administrative division of the Province of South Prussia and then Province of Posen (Poznań), of the Kingdom of Prussia. And landkreis (rural district) is often translated to powiat in Polish, which in turn is translated to county in English. But there was definitely no county of Gnesen. Of course, there were landed nobility in the said district, whether there were some Switalskis should be the focus of your research. There were definitely no Switalskis (or Świtalskis) with a noble title.



Also, the name Switalski (Świtalski) is clearly of Polish origin, so maybe you should focus your research on the genealogy of Polish nobility, not German and definitely not of German princely and royal houses. Maybe that's the reason why you have so little information now.

Maguet said:
Hi
My great great aunt (I believe) was a housekeeper for the Graf (count) of Grafschaft Gnesen in germany ( now Poland I believe..gniezno?)

The family story is that he married her. His name was switalski (I believe)

The story gets a bit muddled after this..apparently they lost their manor house and property during the war to the Russians...but the german nobility should have been long collapsed by world war 2...maybe he was one of the last survivors?

Anyway, I'm not asking anyone to work on my genealogy, I'd just like to locate this grafshaft (countdown or earldom) of Gnesen and confirm that a Count switalski once owned it and whether or not the house still survives...story is that it took a day to ride around his property on a horse. I'm quite skilled in genealogy but in 20 years I've never found a single reference or picture of this place..

Any advice or hints will be appreciated

Thank you.
Mark
Click to expand...

Hello Mark,
though you do not ask for help, I would like to give you a link to the archdiocese of Gniezko, this is (I believe) the simplest way to find further information, because their books and archives should cover everything from there.
And Gnesen is popular because of its history ( Akt von Gnesen) but this was long before the 20. century and after that the influence of the Catholic church is known but hardly any noble family from there, as you recognised yourself already.
Look here:
Archidiecezja Gnie?nie?ska

I doubt that a dukedom or something of Gnesen has existed at the time you mentioned, maybe the person you mention was from gentry and owned a house& land near by the town.
It is rather difficult to find information if you do not know the exact name.
Good luck!

BUT! take a look what google told me, there are at least two persons left in Gniezno who carry the name. A dancing school Switalski and a shopowner, both have a website and can easily be contacted and hopefully give more information ;-)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lady Violet and Lady Eliza Manners attended The Gentleman's Journal Christmas Drinks at Wild by Tart in London yesterday:



** Pic **
 
tausi said:
Lady Melissa Percy announces a pregnancy! Congratulations to her!
The guy is an older gentleman who just went through a nasty divorce.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...xpecting-child-Remy-Trafelet.html#socialLinks
Click to expand...

I'm a little surprised this is in the Cambridge friends' thread instead of the nobility thread since in a post-divorce interview Missy described William, Catherine, and Harry as "his friends", his being Tom's. She said post-divorce she only "hung onto" Chelsy.

As for the baby news, the Percy's are going in a backwards order. The youngest became a parent first, now the 3rd-born is pregnant, maybe George will be next. ;)

I will say her future husband being named Remy is amusing since her brother, Max, has a baby girl named Romy. Is there a Rumy somewhere in the future? :D
 
I hope she has better luck with her second marriage as her first imploded pretty quickly. I do remember her saying in an interview she always preferred the US and American men.
 
It is quite surprising that Lady Melissa had a shotgun wedding. One can wonder how long this marriage will last.
 
Last edited:
Although we live in the age of "baby mamas" and "baby daddies" being quite acceptable, some couples choose to marry upon getting pregnant. It doesn't make the chances of a successful marriage any worse or any better. Marriage takes work no matter how its entered into.

It does, however, raise the question "did he/she marry me because of the pregnancy or because he/she loved me" kind of thoughts ?
 
I hope that the couple are happy together and that their marriage will last despite the fact they married quickly after Lady Melissa's pregnancy was announced.
 
They had been dating for a couple of years at least. Although she and her ex husband were together on and off for much of their 20s. In that interview where she announced her pregnancy she did say she took the divorce as a way to evaluate what she really wanted out of life, so I hope it works out for her. He already has three teenage and down kids from a previous marriage.

She's probably not the first in the Percy family to have conception and marriage occur that way around. "premature first babies are always big and healthy for being born at 6-7 months" and all that.
 
Viscountess Weymouth attended the Fiorucci Launch X Ned's Club event at The Ned in London on january 5:



** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 **
 
Last edited:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Viscountess Weymouth attends at the Roland Mouret's London Fashion Week show

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...ned-silver-dress-Roland-Mourets-LFW-show.html

And at the Tommy Hilfiger show

https://www.rexfeatures.com/livefee...eleb=Emma Weymouth&folder=London Fashion Week

Viscountess Weymouth at the Burberry show, in London Fashion Week on 17 February

https://www.rexfeatures.com/livefee...eleb=Emma Weymouth&folder=London Fashion Week

A daughter for Lady Melissa Trafelet [nee Percy], daughter of the Duke of Northumberland



https://peeragenews.blogspot.com/2020/02/bluebell-rose-trafelet-born-2020.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Earl of Shrewsbury calls for new law to let daughters inherit noble titles

Lord Shrewsbury, recorded by Debrett's as the Premier Earl of England and Ireland, will say:

[...]

“We are now in 2020, and the whole world has changed even though my loathing of political correctness hasn’t, as my friends will confirm.

[...]

He will add: "We all benefit from their capabilities, their knowledge and their great sense. It is widely thought that businesses with women on boards are more productive and successful than those without such a presence."

He has support from Lord Waverley, who describes male primogeniture as “morally unsustainable”.

[...]

Penny Mourdaunt, a Cabinet Office minister, is also supportive of changing the law.
Click to expand...

A wonderful and surprising turnaround. Whereas a small minority of male hereditary peers have spoken up for women's rights of inheritance, most of their number consists of peers who have a daughter or daughters but lack a direct male heir, inviting doubt about whether they support gender equality or merely do not wish their peerages (and any unofficially linked estates and fortunes) to pass to a different branch of the family. But Lord Shrewsbury has a son and grandson who are in line to succeed him.
 
We'll know how abhorrent they feel about sex discrimination when we see the majority of peers campaigning for their eldest child to succeed to the title, regardless of sex. I can't envisage many peers insisting that their eldest son shouldn't inherit the title if he has an older sister.
 
Lilyflo said:
We'll know how abhorrent they feel about sex discrimination when we see the majority of peers campaigning for their eldest child to succeed to the title, regardless of sex. I can't envisage many peers insisting that their eldest son shouldn't inherit the title if he has an older sister.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Lord Shrewsbury's stand is all the more credible because he is clearly in the minority among male hereditary peers and because his oldest son and heir apparent has an older sister (although as his children are in their forties it is highly unlikely that his son would be displaced even if the law were to be reformed).
 
News, Updates on the Extended Family of Antony Armstrong-Jones, 1st Earl of Snowdon

Hello! I’ve been lurking on the forums for months, but it’s just now that I signed up fully in the forum!

I am a huge history fan though I have to blame my following for the Netflix series The Crown and it’s where I became an admirer of one of the show’s main characters, Tony Armstrong-Jones, more known as Lord Snowdon or the 1st Earl of Snowdon (and since he already passed away and his son is the current Earl, so we have to distinguish who’s who).

Even if it was many years that had passed since he and Princess Margaret divorced, but his life within and outside the Firm has always been fascinating to learn, and especially his charity work.

I noticed that there isn’t an active forum about him, aside from David and Serena & Sarah and Daniel. (There was one thread about Frances and Rodolphe but it’s only about their wedding). So I thought I could start with discussing about his extended family and other news and updates.

Discussions open here:

  • Lady Frances and Rodolphe von Hofmannsthal and family (daughter and son-in-law)
  • Lucy, Countess of Snowdon (she and Lord Snowdon have separated but did not fully divorce) (by the way, she turned 79 yesterday, March 11!)
  • Peregrine and Caroline Armstrong-Jones and family (Lord Snowdon’s much younger half-brother who organizes royal family parties with Bentley’s Entertainment)
  • Tony’s Irish relatives - Veseys and Parsons (Viscount de Vesci and Earl of Rosse, respectively)
  • Snowdon Trust - charity established by Lord Snowdon in 1981, and has helped many disabled students achieve scholarships
  • Photographs and other works by Snowdon

We can do further discuss topics here!
 
Tatiana Maria said:
Agreed. Lord Shrewsbury's stand is all the more credible because he is clearly in the minority among male hereditary peers and because his oldest son and heir apparent has an older sister (although as his children are in their forties it is highly unlikely that his son would be displaced even if the law were to be reformed).
Click to expand...

If peerages can pass down the female line then few if any would ever become extinct (some ancient English & older Scottish titles always have of course). But isn't extinction a natural part of the peerage system? It is at the least part of their historical curiousity. And why the eldest? Isn't age discrimation as indefensible in reality as that based on sex?
 
Durham said:
If peerages can pass down the female line then few if any would ever become extinct (some ancient English & older Scottish titles always have of course). But isn't extinction a natural part of the peerage system? It is at the least part of their historical curiousity. And why the eldest?
Click to expand...

The extinction of peerages depends not only on nature but on the application of manmade laws. Women who marry peers "naturally" give birth to both daughters and sons, as do all other women, but are frequently demanded to bear sons to protect the peerage from extinction or even passage to a different branch of the family.

Durham said:
Isn't age discrimation as indefensible in reality as that based on sex?
Click to expand...

The standard remainder to "heirs male of the body" does not discriminate on age. At times the first in line to a peerage is younger than the second in line (a son and a brother of the present peer), and at times the first in line is older than the second in line (a brother and a nephew of the present peer).
 
Tatiana Maria said:
The extinction of peerages depends not only on nature but on the application of manmade laws. Women who marry peers "naturally" give birth to both daughters and sons, as do all other women, but are frequently demanded to bear sons to protect the peerage from extinction or even passage to a different branch of the family.



The standard remainder to "heirs male of the body" does not discriminate on age. At times the first in line to a peerage is younger than the second in line (a son and a brother of the present peer), and at times the first in line is older than the second in line (a brother and a nephew of the present peer).
Click to expand...

But surely limiting a peerage to male lines has a probable & desirable built in expiration date. Unless people want them to go on for ever. Peerages are an anachronism that have no use today. As the Duke of Devonshire says he's not important but Chatsworth is. Best to let them slowly disappear from Britain over time. They are a reminder of systemic inequality even if powerless today.

The point about age is that if females can inherit then they will only do so if they are the eldest child. So to my way of thinking you're just replacing one way of discriminating among siblings for another. Both equally unjust. Sex blind primogeniture is still primogeniture. I don't see how that's defensible.
 
Last edited:
Durham said:
But surely limiting a peerage to male lines has a probable & desirable built in expiration date. Unless people want them to go on for ever. Peerages are an anachronism that have no use today. As the Duke of Devonshire says he's not important but Chatsworth is. Best to let them slowly disappear from Britain over time. They are a reminder of systemic inequality even if powerless today.
Click to expand...

In that case, why would it be best to let them continue as a reminder of systemic inequality against women rather than abolish them? The evidence shows that male-only inheritance does not have a built-in expiration date: The peerage system has continued for hundreds of years and shows no signs of slowly disappearing.

Durham said:
The point about age is that if females can inherit then they will only do so if they are the eldest child. So to my way of thinking you're just replacing one way of discriminating among siblings for another. Both equally unjust. Sex blind primogeniture is still primogeniture. I don't see how that's defensible.
Click to expand...

"Discrimination among siblings" is part of the existing, male-only system. Only the eldest son inherits; his brothers and sisters do not.
 
Last edited:
Tatiana Maria said:
In that case, why would it be best to let them continue as a reminder of systemic inequality against women rather than abolish them? The evidence shows that male-only inheritance does not have a built-in expiration date: The peerage system has continued for hundreds of years and shows no signs of slowly disappearing.



"Discrimination among siblings" is part of the existing, male-only system. Only the eldest son inherits; his brothers and sisters do not.
Click to expand...

An interesting debate thank you:flowers:

Well I'd rather abolish them than let them exist forever. So maybe we'd agree on that?

Peerages go extinct all the time. I'm not sure what evidence you have to prove that the peerage will not go extinct eventually. No hereditary peerages are created outside of the royal family.

Since the civil war the English/British have tended to go for evolution rather than revolutionary change so abolition probably won't happen.

I don't understand why anyone would want to replace male primogeniture with sex blind primogeniture. It's still discrimination. I get that it's sexist but I think the inevitable result, which would be to perpetuate the system, is a worse alternative. The titled aristocracy needs to go. And it will do over time. It's not fundamentally about men & women it's about the class system.

Incidentally I never understood why the poor old younger sons of earls are Hons while their sisters are "Lady". The peculiarities of the British aristocracy.
 
Last edited:
Durham said:
An interesting debate thank you:flowers:

Well I'd rather abolish them than let them exist forever. So maybe we'd agree on that?

Peerages go extinct all the time. I'm not sure what evidence you have to prove that the peerage will not go extinct eventually. No hereditary peerages are created outside of the royal family.

Since the civil war the English/British have tended to go for evolution rather than revolutionary change so abolition probably won't happen.
Click to expand...

I agree that abolition is improbable in the foreseeable future, but I think eliminating the seats allocated to hereditary peers from the House of Lords is realistic if difficult. :flowers:

The evidence that the peerage system will not go extinct in the foreseeable future from the death of male heirs is that the hereditary peerage has perpetuated for hundreds of years using male-only inheritance, in spite of child mortality rates which were above that of modern times and the lack of the fertility treatments and sex-selection methods which some families wanting sons use today, and that most hereditary peerages currently have male heirs.


Durham said:
I don't understand why anyone would want to replace male primogeniture with sex blind primogeniture. It's still discrimination. I get that it's sexist but I think the inevitable result, which would be to perpetuate the system, is a worse alternative. The titled aristocracy needs to go. And it will do over time. It's not fundamentally about men & women it's about the class system.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why continuing the system is not perpetuating it, or how laws establishing that men are entitled to inherit while women are disinherited are not fundamentally about men.
 
What about a compromise step, striking "heirs male" and simply allowing girls to inherit in the absence of boys, as has been done on occasion?

That probably won't satisfy anyone. :)
 
Tatiana Maria said:
I agree that abolition is improbable in the foreseeable future, but I think eliminating the seats allocated to hereditary peers from the House of Lords is realistic if difficult. :flowers:

The evidence that the peerage system will not go extinct in the foreseeable future from the death of male heirs is that the hereditary peerage has perpetuated for hundreds of years using male-only inheritance, in spite of child mortality rates which were above that of modern times and the lack of the fertility treatments and sex-selection methods which some families wanting sons use today, and that most hereditary peerages currently have male heirs.




I don't understand why continuing the system is not perpetuating it, or how laws establishing that men are entitled to inherit while women are disinherited are not fundamentally about men.
Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain that there have been as many if not more peerages in existence that went extinct than exist now so who knows about their continuation. I need to check sources for that admittedly. There have certainly been numerous dukedoms go extinct.

I think what you're saying is that the peerage is not going to go away anytime soon so why not make it sex neutral. Whereas I'm saying the whole system is an anchronism that needs to go & having more female peers is a hindrance to that eventuality.

Not sure how we can reconcile this one?

I still think it's more about class than the rights of women. Aristocratic women have far more in common with aristocratic men than they do with the great majority of other women. I don't really see them as part of a disadvantaged sisterhood. Quite the reverse in fact.

I'm certain that those male peers arguing for reform do so from a desire to maintain the aristocracy as a class rather than out of any great interest in the rights of women.

I sound like a marxist.:lol: But I do think class loyalty & consciousness is the key here not modern day identity politics. It's about self preservation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
King Louis XVIII of France and Marie Joséphine of Savoy
Replies
2
Views
588
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
Blog Real
Archives of the Royal Households
Replies
0
Views
975
Blog Real
Blog Real
Blog Real
Kings Ferdinand I, Francis I, Ferdinand II, Francis II & Kingdom of the Two Sicilies
Replies
2
Views
505
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
Blog Real
King Æthelred II (966-1016) & Wifes (Ælfgifu of York & Emma of Normandy)
Replies
2
Views
471
Tirilschatz
Tirilschatz
Blog Real
King Henry IV (1367-1413) and Wives (Mary de Bohun and Joan of Navarre)
Replies
5
Views
1K
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom