The British Nobility thread 1: Ending 2022

[HereditaryPrincess]

A glamorous photo that I haven't seen before of the late Duchess of Devonshire and her son (I think) at HM's coronation in 1953:

http://www.noblesseetroyautes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/11th-duchess-ld-h.jpg

 

[MAfan]

IIRC, from her memoirs, she told that originally she wasn't expected to attend the Coronation, since she was pregnant at the time; unfortunately in April 1953 the baby was born too early and died soon after the birth. Due to this fact she didn't intend to partecipate the coronation and therefore she didn't arrange any preparation.
However, she was persuaded to attend it by her husband Andrew and her mother in law Mary, the Dowager Duchess, who was also Mistress of the Robes of the Queen; also her son Peregrine would act as page to his grandmother (despite the fact that he was only nine).

At the Coronation she wore and old peeress' robe, found stored somewhere at Chatsworth; the dress was strapless and she needed a special permission from the Queen to wear it.
The Dowager Duchess Mary wore the robes last used by her own mother in lae Evelyn at the 1937 Coronation.
The then Marquess of Hartington wore a page uniform which dated back to George V's coronation in 1911.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

Thanks for the additional detail. I'd read that she had some miscarriages though that's sad info about her baby.

Do we know if the late Duchess and HM had a friendship or how well they knew each other?

 

[Tilia C.]

That's really a very interesting, although rather sad story. I wonder about those old peeress robes. May they be from Queen Victoria's coronation? That off-the-shoulder cut reminds me of the fashion in her time.

 

[JR76]

She was most unfortunate with her children. Miscarriages, several of them died the same day they were born etc.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community mobile app

 

[MAfan]

Thanks for the additional detail. I'd read that she had some miscarriages though that's sad info about her baby.

She had seven pregnancies, but unfortunately only three of her children survived (Emma, Peregrine and Sophie). One pregnancy ended in miscarriage at around the third month, in 1946, while the other three babies died soon after birth.
That was very sad indeed; I've been quite impressed about how openly she spoke about all this in her memoirs.

Do we know if the late Duchess and HM had a friendship or how well they knew each other?

I don't know if there was a friendship between them, but I didn't get this impression from her book.
Instead she developed a friendship with the Prince of Wales, from the 1980s; IIRC he stayed at Chatsworth for some times to meet with the old Harold Macmillan, Earl of Stockton, who was Andrew Devonshire's uncle; on these occasions he developed a friendship with Deborah.

 

[Tilia C.]

That's really a very interesting, although rather sad story. I wonder about those old peeress robes. May they be from Queen Victoria's coronation? That off-the-shoulder cut reminds me of the fashion in her time.

I just found that the robes go back as far as Duchess Georgiana, née Lady Spencer. (Kira Knightly famously depicted her in 'The Duchess'.) She lived from 1757 -1806, so the robes are much older than I thought, from the 18th century.

 

[An Ard Ri]

A glamorous photo that I haven't seen before of the late Duchess of Devonshire and her son (I think) at HM's coronation in 1953:

http://www.noblesseetroyautes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/11th-duchess-ld-h.jpg

Its a really beautiful photo,i had no idea about her miscarriages,how terribly sad for the duchess.

 

[Rudolph]

Lords Spiritual

Lords Spiritual consist of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and twenty-four Bishops (by rotation but, always including the Bishops of London, Durham, and Winchester).

The Archbishop of Canterbury is the first peer of England next to the Royal Family, preceding not only all Dukes, but all the great officers of the Crown. "It belongs to him to crown the King." The Sovereign and his or her consort are speciales domestici parochiani Arch Cant (parishioners of the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury). The Archbishop of Canterbury is Primate of all England, is entitled to the prefix of "Your Grace," and is formally styled "By Divine Providence, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury."

The Archbishop of York is the third peer in the United Kingdom, and precedes all secular peers, except the Lord High Chancellor. He is entitled the prefix of "Your Grace," and is formally styled "By Divine Providence, Lord Archbishop of York."

Diocesan Bishops of England, with the exceptions noted, are also peers of the kingdom and of Parliament, and take precedence of the temporal barons.

The Bishops of London, Durham, and Winchester have precedence over all the other bishops who are ranked according to the seniority of their consecration. All Diocesan bishops are entitled to the prefix of Lord and are styled as "Right Reverend Father in God, by Divine Permission, Lord Bishop of _____."

The mitre, placed over the arms of all archbishops and bishops, is a round cap, pointed and cleft at the top, from which hang two pendants, fringed at the ends, it is surmounted by a fillet of gold, set with precious stones, The mitre of the Bishop of Durham (as nominally Count Palatine of Durham) is represented as issuing out of a ducal crest coronet.

A bishop impales his arms with those of his See, but he does not bear a crest, supporters, or motto. The wives and children of bishops do not receive any special precedence because of their station.

 

[Mbruno]

The Lords Spiritual are obviously an anachronistic element of the British constitution as any links IMHO between Church and State. I hope they are abolished whenever the House of Lords is reformed.

 

[wyevale]

Obviously Mbruno.. your opinion [in Pittsburgh] will be pivotal in any decision making process..

 

[Mbruno]

Obviously Mbruno.. your opinion [in Pittsburgh] will be pivotal in any decision making process..

I'm not saying my opinion will have any influence, but I'm entitled to voice it anyway. After all, think of how many people outside the US express their opinion on who should be the President of the United States, or on how Obama was "better" than Mitt Romney, or how "dumb" George W Bush was, etc etc.

Saying that someone cannot comment on the constitution or politics of another country is pure xenophobia IMHO. I favor separation of Church and State as a principle, in the same way for example that I oppose the death penalty as a matter of principle. That is true whether I'm talking about the US, the UK, Iran, or any other country.

 

[Osipi]

The Archbishop of Canterbury is the first peer of England next to the Royal Family, preceding not only all Dukes, but all the great officers of the Crown. "It belongs to him to crown the King." The Sovereign and his or her consort are speciales domestici parochiani Arch Cant (parishioners of the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury). The Archbishop of Canterbury is Primate of all England, is entitled to the prefix of "Your Grace," and is formally styled "By Divine Providence, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury."

Most interesting and definitely top on the list of things I learned today.

Interesting though here. When the Archbishop of Canterbury crowns Charles, regardless of her title, Camilla will be speciales domestici parochian alongside Charles?

 

[MARG]

The Lords Spiritual are obviously an anachronistic element of the British constitution as any links IMHO between Church and State. I hope they are abolished whenever the House of Lords is reformed.

Since the Lords Spiritual are appointed by the Crown I do not see that happening too quickly.

However, I am interested in your reasons for advocating change. The USA takes great pride in its history and it's Constitution in particular. Your two house system of Congress and Senate is seemingly not too dissimilar in its inception if not execution to that of the Commons and the Lords. Do you, therefore, advocate the dissolution of the Senate?

As to your Presidents, etc. Unlike the Archbishop of Canterbury or his Bishops, they are Politicians and speak for their party, acting and impacting on the global stage, as indeed does the Prime Minister of the UK and other countries. They come into our homes via the media and the ramifications of their decisions can end up affecting our lives. So yes, we feel quite happy to comment on your Presidents, etc.

The Lords Spiritual have no such power. I do, however, wonder at your equating the abolition of the Lords Spiritual to the abolition of the death sentence. A tiny tad overkill don't you think?

 

[cepe]

The Lords Spiritual are obviously an anachronistic element of the British constitution as any links IMHO between Church and State. I hope they are abolished whenever the House of Lords is reformed.

You are advocating (apparently) the removal of the most senior clerics of the Anglican Church. These are people of religion, not politicians, nobles, or even friends of either.

They exist as Lords Spiritual because the Church of England is an "established" church, with the Monarch at its Supreme Governor.

Frankly, I don't really understand what you are saying.... so could you try again?

 

[grevinnan]

The Lords Spiritual are obviously an anachronistic element of the British constitution as any links IMHO between Church and State. I hope they are abolished whenever the House of Lords is reformed.

So why exactly do you not like the current system? And why do you "hope"?

 

[grevinnan]

I'm not saying my opinion will have any influence, but I'm entitled to voice it anyway. After all, think of how many people outside the US express their opinion on who should be the President of the United States, or on how Obama was "better" than Mitt Romney, or how "dumb" George W Bush was, etc etc.

Saying that someone cannot comment on the constitution or politics of another country is pure xenophobia IMHO. I favor separation of Church and State as a principle, in the same way for example that I oppose the death penalty as a matter of principle. That is true whether I'm talking about the US, the UK, Iran, or any other country.

I get that you favor separation of church and state but why would you post an opinion about another country's constitution without an explanation of why it should be different. To have an opinion without any weight behind it is not necessarily something to be proud of.

 

[Rudolph]

DNA evidence could be used for the first time to resolve a feud over a hereditary aristocratic title after the Queen personally intervened in the case.

The dispute was triggered when an amateur genealogist revealed that a distinguished baronet came from a different bloodline to his relatives, suggesting there may have been an illegitimate child in a previous generation.

The two rival branches of the family have since spent thousands of pounds on a legal battle to prove which is the true line.

Peerage authorities have been called upon to determine if genetic material could be used to determine who should inherit the Pringle of Stichill baronetcy.

The Queen herself referred the case to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

The little-known court of top judges will rule on whether DNA evidence can lawfully be used to settle the issue of the hereditary title.

Read more: Queen intervenes to settle aristocratic feud opening way to title pretenders - Telegraph

 

[Rudolph]

Blenheim Palace @BlenheimPalace
Today, with great respect and admiration, we remember the 11th Duke of Marlborough on the anniversary of his death.

https://twitter.com/BlenheimPalace/status/654930112593448964

 

[Dman]

America's Million Dollar Princesses: The real-life Downton-style unions with English aristocracy that produced Princess Diana, Churchill and put the Queen on the throne-
America's Million Dollar Princesses | Daily Mail Online

 

[Furienna]

Yes, I just love that article!

 

[Dman]

BBC documentary reveals Britain's dukes last of a dying breed: The Last Dukes can be seen on October 26 at 9pm on BBC Two-
BBC documentary reveals Britain's dukes last of a dying breed | History | News | Daily Express

 

[Dman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrfFvgjBAyE

 

[Tilia C.]

Am I the only one who doesn't get a sound for this video? It looks like it would be very interesting.

 

[Furienna]

BBC documentary reveals Britain's dukes last of a dying breed: The Last Dukes can be seen on October 26 at 9pm on BBC Two-
BBC documentary reveals Britain's dukes last of a dying breed | History | News | Daily Express

What a sad article. But yeah, if the British aristocracy started having these problems already back in the Victorian age, we can only imagine what they have to go through today.

 

[Dman]

I think they may have their sound muted or something.

 

[MAfan]

A question I have been wondering about for some time: does a settled and definite correct way exist for styling the daughters of Peers who are married to Baronets?
A couple of examples:
Annabel Goldsmith (née Vane-Tempest-Stuart): as the daughter of a Marquess, she would be called Lady Annabel Goldsmith; as the wife (now widow) of a Baronet, she should be Lady Goldsmith and later Annabel, Lady Goldsmith.
Carina Frost (née Fitzalan-Howard): as the daughter of the Duke of Norfolk, she shoud be styled Lady Carina Frost; as the wife (now widow) of a Baronet she should be Lady Frost and now Carina, Lady Frost.
Which of the two is the most correct way to style them?

 

[Rudolph]

A Baronet is not a peer. The holder of the title is a commoner. So for example Lady Carina Frost is the correct style and not Lady Frost

The same would apply to Annabel Goldsmith. Her style would be Lady Annabel Goldsmith and not Lady Goldsmith.

This style applies to the daughters of Dukes. Marquess and Earls who marry commoners

Lord Lucan will be declared dead this week 41 years after he disappeared | Daily Mail Online

 

[MAfan]

Thank you; I had not considered that, in any case, it is the daughter of a Peer marrying to a commoner, and this is the decisive point of the question.

 

[wyevale]

The Earl of Arundel & Surrey, son & heir of the Duke of Norfolk is to wed Cecilia Colacicchi.