# The "Lord" in "Alfred Lord Tennyson" **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 9, 2005, 6:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643 "2005-03-09T06:32:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![The\_Punkyova](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@The\_Punkyova](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Punkyova)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/21 "2005-03-10T17:12:23Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Philip was required to give up his Greek/Danish titles before he was allowed to marry Princess Elizabeth. Later, Elizabeth decreed that he would have the right to be called “Prince Philip.” Thus, he his Prince Philip, not in his own right, but because his wife said he could be. This has actually been discussed on the boards in the past, but I don’t remember the exact outcome. IIRC, he gave up his various titles to join the Royal Navy. Then, someone figured out that he was a descendant of Archduchess Sophie, and a naturalized British citizen because of that. (Has to do with the Hanoverian succession.) Then, George VI granted him titles so that the grandchildren would not be born commoners. Then, Elizabeth made a decree when she became queen, trying to sort everything out. The upshot of it all is that he was born Prince Philip of Greece and is now HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinborough. There are rules for titles and such, but the Monarch can trump all of them and declare anything s/he wants. You are right about that! ---
**Author:** ![The\_Punkyova](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@The\_Punkyova](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Punkyova)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/22 "2005-03-10T17:19:23Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Is this right? It was my understanding that a woman who had a title by birth kept the title even if she married a man of lower rank. However, a title a woman inherited would go with her first name (“Lady Jane”) while a title she married into would go with her married surname (“Lady Doe”). Hmm. I’m thinking that you might be right on this. I have a vague memory that Lady Antonia Fraser had the title because she was the daughter of a Scottish noble, married to a commoner with the last name Fraser. OK. But her husband does not automatically assume her title, it has to be a special grant. (Usually if she is the only heir or something.) If Lady Jane Smith married Mr. John Doe, he did not become Lord Doe. Whereas if Miss Jane Smith married Lord John Doe, she bacame Jane, Lady Doe. Does that seem better? ---
**Author:** ![Bookkeeper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bookkeeper/32/281_2.png) [@Bookkeeper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bookkeeper)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/23 "2005-03-10T17:49:13Z")
There is additional info in [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=304845&highlight=title), and different styles of address and pretty much everything else you wanted to know about British titles and nobility are covered in the link in post #14. ---
**Author:** ![WeRSauron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f19dbf/32.png) [@WeRSauron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WeRSauron)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/24 "2005-03-10T20:28:10Z")
After going to the website referred by **Bookkeeper** , I must remark that this business of titles and whatnot is so very, very complex. No wonder the Founding Fathers of the United States wanted to have nothing to do with titles and such. WRS - Long Live the Queen, but may titles and peerages be far away from us! ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/25 "2005-03-10T20:36:02Z")
> [@](#): > > However, in English custom, you never address a baron directly as “Baron X.” You address him as “Lord X.” Thus, upon meeting Alfred, you would address him as “Lord Whatsis.” Following from this, Alfred would commonly be referred to in the third person as “Lord Whatsis,” with the understanding that his title was really “Baron Whatsis.” Thus, you get the construction “Alfred, Lord Whatsis.” What if there were two separate peerages called Whatsis, say, a baron and an earl? Would one refer to both of them as “Lord Whatsis”, or would one use a location to distinguish them (and what if they’re both the same location, too), or would one, in that case, use “Baron Whatsis” and “Earl Whatsis”? And what about formal, stuffy usages? Would one ever, for ceremonial purposes, give the full laundry list of a peer’s titles? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/26 "2005-03-10T20:46:59Z")
> [@](#): > > What if there were two separate peerages called Whatsis, say, a baron and an earl? Would one refer to both of them as “Lord Whatsis”, or would one use a location to distinguish them (and what if they’re both the same location, too), or would one, in that case, use “Baron Whatsis” and “Earl Whatsis”? “Lord Whatsis” is always a baron. You wouldn’t refer to a viscount, earl, marquess, or duke as just plain “lord.” > [@](#): > > And what about formal, stuffy usages? Would one ever, for ceremonial purposes, give the full laundry list of a peer’s titles? Yes, but you wouldn’t ever directly address someone that way. ---
**Author:** ![toadspittle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c0e974/32.png) [@toadspittle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/toadspittle)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/27 "2005-03-10T20:51:14Z")
Are knighthoods hereditary? Paul McCartney was made a Peer … but are all of his children just ordinary, not-noble persons? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/28 "2005-03-10T20:54:37Z")
Sir Paul is not a peer. He’s a knight. Knights (and baronets) are not nobles and the titles are not heritable. On the other hand, effing Andrew Lloyd-Weber is a freaking baron. Oh, the pity. Shows you how much the queen knows. ---
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/29 "2005-03-10T20:59:40Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Sir Paul is not a peer. He’s a knight. Knights (and baronets) are not nobles and the titles are not heritable. The title of a knight bachelor is \*\*not \*\* hereditary. The title of a baronet \*\*is \*\* hereditary. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/30 "2005-03-10T21:01:06Z")
Sorry, you’re right, a baronetcy is hereditary, but it’s not a title of nobility. It’s basically just a heritable knighthood. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/31 "2005-03-10T21:10:54Z")
International criminal Mark Thatcher happens to be a baronet. He inherited his baronetcy from his father, Sir Denis Thatcher, Bart., who was given his baronetcy because otherwise he would be stuck in the embarrassing position of being a man with no title married to a baroness, that is, the former prime minister, Margaret Hilda Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher, L.G., O.M., P.C., F.R.S. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/32 "2005-03-10T21:14:54Z")
(Lady of the Garter, Order of Merit, Privy Counsellor, Fellow of the Royal Society) Sir Denis was also a K.B.E. (Knight Commander of the British Empire). ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/33 "2005-03-10T21:20:17Z")
All this reminds me of a joke from “Yes, Minister,” in which Hacker and Bernard were dishing Sir Humphrey behind his back. Sir Humphrey was a knight of the Order of St. Michael and St. George. The lowest rank in the order is “companion,” abbreviated as “C.M.G.” Sir Humphrey was a knight commander (K.C.M.G.) and wanted to be a knight grand cross (G.C.M.G.). According to Bernard, so far as members of the order were concerned, “C.M.G.,” “K.C.M.G.,” and “G.C.M.G.” really stood for “call me God,” “kindly call me God,” and “God calls me God.” ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/34 "2005-03-10T21:22:32Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > What if there were two separate peerages called Whatsis, say, a baron and an earl? Would one refer to both of them as “Lord Whatsis”, or would one use a location to distinguish them (and what if they’re both the same location, too), or would one, in that case, use “Baron Whatsis” and “Earl Whatsis”? > > And what about formal, stuffy usages? Would one ever, for ceremonial purposes, give the full laundry list of a peer’s titles? It actually does happen. On another peerage thread, somebody gave the example of a peer who was Earl and Duke of the same geographic area. He had a daughter, who succeeded to one title, IIRC the Duchy, as his heir of line, but the Earldom went by strict male inheritance, so it reverted to a third cousin. Ordinarily one almost never refers to a Baron as Baron Whatsis, but rather as Lord Whatsis. The exception is in describing him as 7th Baron Whatsis of Wheresis in formal listings. Anybody up to Marquess may also be addressed or alluded to as Lord Whatsis, but it’s most common for Earls to be Earl Whatsis, and not uncommon for Viscounts and Marquesses to be epithetted Viscount or Marquess Whatsis. And you would certainly use that distinction if there were two men, one Viscount or Earl Farnsworth and the other Lord (Baron) Farnsworth. (Address of Dukes is something entirely different, and peculiar.) The “full train of goods wagons” is used only in formal biographies, Burke’s and Debrett’s Peerages, and conceivably in official proclamations regarding him. Normally he will use only the title of highest rank: Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount, or Baron, in that descending order. =========== BTW, as a descendant of Queen Victoria, Prince Philip is in fact in line for the throne **in his own right** , though he’s quite a ways down in the line of succession. AFAIK that is the first time that a royal consort has ever been in the line of succession for England, other than the unique case of William and Mary, though Lord Darnley was a possible heir for Mary Queen of Scots, albeit well down the line of succession too. ---
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/35 "2005-03-10T21:37:03Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > It actually does happen. On another peerage thread, somebody gave the example of a peer who was Earl and Duke of the same geographic area. He had a daughter, who succeeded to one title, IIRC the Duchy, as his heir of line, but the Earldom went by strict male inheritance, so it reverted to a third cousin. See [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=304845&highlight=sutherland) (post no 13) for the example of the Dukedom and Earldom of Sutherland. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/36 "2005-03-10T21:50:30Z")
> [@The Punkyova](#): > > Hmm. I’m thinking that you might be right on this. I have a vague memory that Lady Antonia Fraser had the title because she was the daughter of a Scottish noble, married to a commoner with the last name Fraser. > > OK. But her husband does not automatically assume her title, it has to be a special grant. (Usually if she is the only heir or something.) If Lady Jane Smith married Mr. John Doe, he did not become Lord Doe. Whereas if Miss Jane Smith married Lord John Doe, she bacame Jane, Lady Doe. > > Does that seem better? P.G. Wodehouse was, as far as I can tell, scrupulously correct in how he used the titles of his characters. Lady Constance Threepwood, the daughter of the eighth Earl of Emsworth, married an untitled commoner, Mr. Threepwood, so by courtesy she continued to be called Lady Constance Keeble. When she later married another commoner, Mr. Schoonmaker, she became Lady Constance Schoonmaker. However, Lord John Doe is not a peer in his own right, but only a younger son of one, just like Lord Peter Wimsey or Lord Randolph Churchill. if Miss Jane Smith marries Lord John Doe, she gets to use “Lady” by courtesy, but **not** with the style Lady Jane. Instead, she’s known as Lady John Doe, or even Lady John, somewhat analogous to the outmoded style Mrs John Doe. IIRC this even extends to woman commoners marrying royal princes. Absent any other title or privilege, if Sophie Rhys-Jones marries HRH Prince Edward, she’s not Princess Sohpie, but Princess Edward! The way a titled woman tells you much about her exact position. [ul] [li]Lady John Doe: the wife of a younger son of a Marquis or higher Peer, but never the wife of a Knight. This woman is never called Lady+\, but may be called Lady John.[/li] [li]Lady Jane Doe: the daughter of an Earl or higher Peer. This woman is never called Lady Doe, but only Lady Jane Doe or Lady Jane.[/li][li]Lady Doe: [list][/li]the wife of Lord Doe, a Peer in his own right [li] **or** a Peeress in her own right [/li] [li] **or** the wife of Sir John Doe, a Knight. Note that in this case she’s never Lady Jane Doe or Lady Jane, but only Lady Doe.[/li][/ul][/list] I don’t even know how or why I learned all this stuff. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Punkyova](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@The\_Punkyova](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Punkyova)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2005, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643/37 "2005-03-10T22:29:08Z")
> [@Spectre of Pithecanthropus](#): > > However, Lord John Doe is not a peer in his own right, but only a younger son of one, just like Lord Peter Wimsey or Lord Randolph Churchill Yes, there is a scene in _Busman’s Honeymoon_, where Peter and Harriet drive up to their new home, and one of the local women calls Harriet “Lady Peter.” Peter later remarks that she got Harriet’s title right, and that isn’t common. (It tells you a lot about the character that she did that.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lord-in-alfred-lord-tennyson/293643.md?page=1)