XPost: alt.history.british, alt.politics.british, alt.talk.royalty   
   From: william.black@hotmail.co.uk   
      
   "David"  wrote in message   
   news:1188838122.974239.224530@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...   
   > On Sep 3, 5:12 am, "William Black"    
   > wrote:   
   >> "Turenne"  wrote in message   
   >>   
   >> news:1188813058.985584.162140@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...   
   >>   
   >> > Nicholas III wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >>In particular most British Aristocrats are not addressed by their title   
   >> >>followed by their first name.   
   >>   
   >> > Only sons of marquesses and dukes. Also knights and baronets and   
   >> > daughters of dukes, marquesses and earls   
   >>   
   >> Knights are not aristocrats.   
   >>   
   >> They are commoners.   
   >   
   > "Aristocrat" isn't a technical term, or an equivalent for "peer".  The   
   > vast majority of aristocrats were and are commoners (as the British   
   > understand the term).  All it means is "upper class", sometimes with   
   > the restriction "upper class by inheritance of several generations".   
   > What an "aristocrat" was in, say, France or Germany, is another matter   
   > entirely.   
   >   
      
   OK.   
      
   Knights remain commoners.   
      
   An aristocrat,  to my mind,  is someone who inherits a title.   
      
   --   
   William Black   
      
      
   I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.   
   Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland   
   I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate   
   All these moments will be lost in time,  like icecream on the beach   
   Time for tea.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)