Titles of Nobility in France? Why?

[ralph124c]

As far as I know, the monarchy in France ended with the demise of the “Second Empire” of Napoleon III (1871). Since that time, France has been a republic. So why are there still counts, Dukes, Barons, etc.?Great Britain is still a monarchy, so I can understand the nobility still being around there…but in a republic, why do they need these people?

[clairobscur]

@ralph124c

As far as I know, the monarchy in France ended with the demise of the “Second Empire” of Napoleon III (1871). Since that time, France has been a republic. So why are there still counts, Dukes, Barons, etc.?Great Britain is still a monarchy, so I can understand the nobility still being around there…but in a republic, why do they need these people?

We don’t need them, but there’s simply no laws forbiding the use of a nobility title.

I believe that you can even assume a nobility title, since the Count of Paris (the main pretender to the throne of France) routinely granted nobility titles to his children, for instance. Though for full effect, you would have to change your family name too (Duc Dupont, the french equivalent of Duke Smith wouldn’t really sound great), and changing your family name (Say, Jean de Noyon instead of Jean Noyer) is another matter entirely, and is legally regulated. As a result, I think (not 100% sure) that I could add “Baron de Quelquepart” behind my name on my private documents if I so wished and if there’s no existing “Baron de Quelquepart”. I could not add it on official documents, though, anymore than I could add “best baker of Paris” even if it’s posted on my hypothetical bakery.

I know the courts occassionnaly make rulings about nobility titles, though. But I don’t really know to which extent. I know that they can rule about who’s the legitimate “owner” of a title in case of dispute. I also know that rulings can be made about the validity of a title (for instance, whether it was properly granted according to the laws in force at the time), which isn’t surprising (the courts can always make rulings about an official act, however old).
More dubious is the fact that the republic still accept the concept that a title is hereditary (for instance if the duc de Josselin dies tomorrow, I can’t just decide that from now on I will be known as Mr Clairobscur, duc de Josselin), and can even deliver official orders to the legitimate claimants to an existing title. I’m not absolutely sure about this, but I believe that, on the other hand, the title can’t be denied to a descendant on the basis of the former laws regulating the inheritance of nobility titles. So, as far as I know, if said duc de Josselin were to die, all his children could decide to add “duc de Josselin” to their names. At least, they could legally do so. It probably wouldn’t fly in their social network, so I assume it’s unlikely to be done, but if it were, the eldest son couldn’t sue his little sister on this issue, for instance.

[clairobscur]

In order to provide a different example of how nobility titles can be handled in a republic :

In Germany, if I’m not mistaken, the title is simply considered as part of the the family name. So, for all legal purposes, the Graf von Unlingen (Graf being a german nobility title) is actually Mr Graf von Unlingen, and so will be all his children, grandchildren, etc…

[Little_Nemo]

There is an important distinction here; there’s nothing about being a republic that prohibits a class of nobility from existing, it just means that the nobility do not have any special political power. So a republic can have princes, dukes, and barons - who all go to the polls on election day and vote along with everyone else for who gets to be the president or prime minister.

[jovan]

@clairobscur

In Germany, if I’m not mistaken, the title is simply considered as part of the the family name. So, for all legal purposes, the Graf von Unlingen (Graf being a german nobility title) is actually Mr Graf von Unlingen, and so will be all his children, grandchildren, etc…

From what I’ve read, the situation is similar in France. See this page:

Titles, to the degree that they exist in French law (that is, represent enforceable rights and obligations), exist as part of the family name or patronym, and get the same protection in civil courts as the latter.

“Les titres nobiliaires, dépouillés aujourd’hui de tout privilège féodal et même de tout privilège de rang, n’ont plus qu’un caractère personnel et honorofique et ne peuvent même plus être considérés, du point de vue juridique, que comme un complément du nom patronymique permettant de mieux distinguer l’identité des personnes, tout en perpétuant de grands souvenirs; si, en vertu de cette sorte de lien de subordination entre le titre nobiliaire et le nom patronymique, il est dû la même protection au titre qu’au nom, on ne lui doit pas une protection spéciale et privilégiée.” Paris, 2 Jan 1896. Dalloz 1896 2.328

Titles are not a full part of the family name, however, for a variety of reasons: they are not inherited by all children equally, but rather follow the rules of inheritance determined by the original grant or act of creation. Also, no one can be forced to use his title. Titles are, however, accessories of the family name, complements which help to distinguish among members of a family. As such, they are entitled to the same legal protection from usurpation as the family name.

“Si le titre de comte comme tout autre titre quelconque ne fait pas partie intégrante du nom patronymique puisque les titulaires ne sont pas tenus de l’ajouter à leur nom en vertu de la maxime “n’est titré qui ne veut”, du moins ce titre se rattache au nom comme un complément permettant de mieux distinguer l’identité des personnes. Par suite, ce titre doit bénéficier de la même protection légale que le nom lui-même, ceux qui en sont investis ayant intérêt tout à la fois à en défendre la propriété et à prévenir des confusions préjudiciables”; Tribunal de Paris, 18 juillet 1893; Dalloz 1893, 2.7

[jayjay]

Strangely, the most shocking thing I’ve read so far in this thread is that clairobscur is un homme! :eek:

Now I just have to figure out WHY I thought he was a she…

[Tamerlane]

@jayjay

Now I just have to figure out WHY I thought he was a she…

I made the same mistake once upon a time - it’s the prefix clair, I think. Which of course means “clear” in french, but in English parses as the female name Claire.

• Tamerlane

[clairobscur]

@jovan

From what I’ve read, the situation is similar in France. See this page:

Very interesting page, and certainly much more accurate than what I wrote above.

[clairobscur]

I’ve however a reservation about the last part of the page that seems to imply that assuming an unexisting title (like the Baron de Quelquepart in my example) would be legally forbidden (and could result in a fine). The way I read a court case linked to in this page seem to imply the contrary (the court refuses to issue a ruling about the validity or lack thereof of a title not aknowledged by the ministry of Justice, stating that since the plaintiff doesn’t prove he’s himself the legitimate holder of the title he has no case against the defendant currently using it).