Lord Edward Somerset obituary: Aristocrat jailed for domestic abuse
Wayward second son of the Duke of Beaufort who was found guilty in 2013 of repeated violence against his wife
Junior sons of a Duke – and only junior sons of a Duke – are Lord first name, second name.
Other peers are first name, Lord, second name.
It is Prem, Lord Sikka, not Lord Prem Sikka.
This is one of those linguistic hills I shall die upon.
Tim: I can’t access this site on my PC when my VPN is connected and on my android phone I get the “Sorry!” message from the /cgi-sys/defaultwebpage.cgi .
Yarp, I still get the ‘Sorry’ message if I try to go direct to this site – even after clearing cache…
As in Lord Peter Wimsey. second son of the Duke of Denver. Clearly, people don’t keep up with modern literature.
Near the end of the series, the Duke died, and the New Duke dies without issue, so Lord Peter became The Duke of Denver. Not Duke Peter Denver, not Duke Peter Wimsey. The Duke Of Denver.
A pendant speaks….
“Also, younger sons of a Marquis.”
I seem to have no problems in Chrome or Safari on the iPhone.
TMB
I removed my shortcut to Tims’ blog, and deleted my browsing history, cookies and other site data, and the cached images and files.
I was then able to access the blog.
Of course I’m using Google.
@jgh: Peter Wimsey was Gerald, Duke of Denver’s younger brother (and indeed the second son of the previous Duke), but he became heir apparent when his nephew, Lord St George, was killed in the Battle of Britain, and then Duke of Denver when Jill Paton Walsh, continuing the series, killed Gerald off in a fire at Duke’s Denver.
My Letters Patent name me as “Jeffrey, Baron Jackfield” so I agree with our host. 🙂
When I was a lad, local farmers were often known by the names of their farms rather than by their own surnames. So John Thompson who farmed Applegate would be known simply as Applegate. I don’t know whether there was a distinction made between tenant farmers and owner farmers.
Before my time some farmers went by an “of”, thus “Thompson of Applegate”. Again I don’t know whether there was some subtle social distinction implied.
Christian names (as we then called them) were simple e.g. three generations of “John” in the same family would be referred to as Auld Jock, Young Jock, and Wee Jock.
Chris: I remember when Lord Peter had to defend Gerald on a murder charge, and he claimed right of trial by the House of Lords, back before such right was abolished, so he’d (Gerald) had inherited by that story. Wasn’t he killed off something WW2-related?
Is this a Muphry’s once removed?
(scrolls back)
Ah, it was the nephew I was thinking about.
. . . can’t access this site on my PC when my VPN is connected and on my android phone . . .
There are probably caches on various web systems waiting to be cleared out, in addition to those on visitors’ devices. Traffic seems light here still so I venture that many are still seeing the site unavailable page.
Tim could put an announcement on his other sites (Substack?) that this one is up again.
It’s very important to uphold the titled aristocracy, otherwise the UK would fall apart, as has every other country that abolished the monarchy. Lest the very fabric of society be rent, forelocks must be tugged. No, despite whatever the Monty Python gang might think, “Good on yer Bruce” is not good protocol when meeting Charles.
. . . can’t access this site on my PC when my VPN is connected and on my android phone . . .
I’ve had the same problem on my PC using Vivaldi browser and have resolved it by deleting all cached items for the last week.
Weird.
In my experience some are good blokes and some are shit blokes, and yes I’ve known one or two, but they’re all the (often inbred) descendants of thieves. Who gives a fuck what anyone calls them? I address them in precisely the same way I address a dry-stone waller, or delivery driver, or barman – all of whom are far more valuable to me.
but they’re all the (often inbred) descendants of thieves.
But these are the descendants of the ones that survived, aren’t they?
The only Third Viscount I know well enough to have actually discussed this with insists that his family were simply border reivers. Good ones, true, but they just happened to be – for that 30, or 50 year period – on top when it all settled down into the law and titles and everything. If it had all settled down in any other period (ie, James VI and I hadn’t been the merger, some other thing had been) then it would have been some 3 or 4th cousin. And everyone in the area was at least a 3 or 4th.
But these are the descendants of the ones that survived, aren’t they?
If you have a child at 16 and die at 17 is your child the descendant of one that survived? Depends how you define survive. Everyone alive is the descendant of someone who survived long enough to get some Doris up the duff (or of the Doris). But so what? We should worry our heads about when to use a Christian name for some daft bellend and when not to? Okay, if you like.
If you have a child at 16 and die at 17 is your child the descendant of one that survived?
If you die at 17 you don’t become an aristocrat do you? For most of history, including now, thievery’s just a business. If you’re no good at it you rot in an iron cage at a crossroads. If you’re good at it you win wealth, respect & power.
If you die at 17 you don’t become an aristocrat do you?
What?
I would have thought it was eff’in obvious, Interested. The career track takes you to aristocracy doesn’t get you dead at 17. And the career track that does will likely preserve both you & your son. It’s same as produced the great merchant & banking families. You do your thievery from the right people, in the right way with the blessings of the right other people, it ceases to be thievery. You become one of the king’s loyal subjects & get your tap on the shoulder.
“If you die at 17 you don’t become an aristocrat do you? ”
I think Interested is talking about proper aristocrats, the ones born to it rather than being given a ratty bit of ermine for having failed at something else. Or for having given a suitably large amount of money to some politicians. It would be quite possible for a son to inherit a title at a young age, and then die young himself, leaving a very young child as the current title holder.