XPost: alt.history.british, alt.politics.british, alt.talk.royalty
From: william.black@hotmail.co.uk
"David" wrote in message
news:1188846116.317278.248240@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 3, 11:49 am, "William Black"
> wrote:
>> "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.
>
> Then that would exclude the late Diana Spencer Windsor.
>
I thought she had a title because of who her daddy was.
She was 'The Lady Diana Spencer'
She will have regained her courtesy title on her divorce.
--
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)
|
