Joanna is on a rant again…
This week, I’ve been reading a historical romance set in Britain in the early Victorian period. I won’t name it, but it’s by a bestselling author. Many characters have titles. It’s full of adventure and very sexy. I enjoyed it.
BUT the bestselling author (who hails from the USA) gets one of her aristocratic titles wrong. Sadly, many do, especially if they’re not Brits. It falls, I suspect, into the pesky category of “unknown unknowns”. It may never occur to an author to check whether she is right about the title she assumes is appropriate.
I resisted the urge to throw the book at the wall. It was a library book, so I couldn’t, however tempted I might have been 😉
Ducal titles have special pitfalls
The title in question related to a dukedom. The misnamed character was the duke’s younger brother. What is the correct courtesy title for the younger brother of a duke?
Let us assume that the duke has the family name Aikenhead. He is Dominic Aikenhead, Duke of Calder. (Fans of my books may notice that I’m using the character names from my Aikenhead Honours Quartet. Do feel free to buy them here, or to read the quartet on Kindle Unlimited here. Yes, shameless promo, but the Libertà website isn’t cheap to run, and you’d like to support us, wouldn’t you?)
Dominic, the duke, has two younger brothers, Leo and Jack. Most authors know that younger brothers of dukes (and of marquesses) use the courtesy title “Lord Something”. But Lord What? Lord Aikenhead?
No, absolutely not, though that is the mistake the author made in the sexy adventure I was reading. And it’s obvious it must be wrong, if you think about it.
If the second brother were to get the courtesy title “Lord Aikenhead”, what title does brother #3 get? “Lord Aikenhead-the-second?” Clearly that approach to titles cannot work, for practical reasons among others.
The answer, for those who don’t know, is that the brother of a duke has the courtesy title “Lord Firstname Familyname”. So the two younger Aikenhead brothers were “Lord Leo Aikenhead” and “Lord Jack Aikenhead”, usually abbreviated in speech to “Lord Leo” and “Lord Jack”. And the younger brother in my sexy adventure should also have been “Lord Jack” since he shared a Christian name with my youngest Aikenhead hero.
Selecting a title for a woman is even hairier
Now, a more taxing question. Assume the duke’s younger brother, Lord Leo, marries an untitled lady called Mary Spinster. A commoner, in fact. Her surname on marriage will become Aikenhead, like her husband’s. What is her title (if any)?
- Lady Mary Aikenhead addressed in speech as Lady Mary
- Mrs Mary Aikenhead
- Lady Leo Aikenhead addressed in speech as Lady Leo
- Mrs Leo Aikenhead
- Lady Aikenhead addressed in speech as Lady Aikenhead
- Mrs Aikenhead
Did you get it right? The answer is number 3. She is “Lady Leo” and would be addressed that way. The only people who would use her own Christian name, Mary, would be family and intimates who would be addressing her as simply “Mary”.
“Lady Mary” would never be used, at least, not by anyone who knew how aristocratic titles work.
There’s a telling scene in Busman’s Honeymoon, the last of Dorothy L Sayers‘ novels starring Lord Peter Wimsey. He is, as it happens, the younger son of the Duke of Denver, hence his courtesy title, Lord Peter.
Lord Peter and his new wife are locked out of their honeymoon cottage and visit Aggie Twitterton to get the spare keys. Unprompted, Aggie correctly addresses Wimsey’s wife as “Lady Peter”. Wimsey comments, “She got your title right first shot, which is unusual.” And that was in a book published in 1937 when formality of address was much more accepted than it now is.
So perhaps authors have some slight defence when they make mistakes over such titles? (When I first read that book, I had no thoughts of becoming a writer and I didn’t know how Wimsey’s wife should be addressed. I remember thinking it was a bit odd. Why not her own first name? When I started researching my historical novels, I found out.)
Equality? In aristocratic titles? You’re kidding, right?
Aristocratic titles are definitely not fertile territory for equality or feminism. Even though the law has been changed for the succession to the British throne—it’s now the first-born who inherits, whether male or female—there is still inequality.
Prince Andrew may now be only Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, but his daughters were automatically styled as Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie from birth. And they still are. His demotion doesn’t affect them. By contrast, the son and daughter of Princess Anne got no automatic titles at birth. They still have none.
Title equality? Equality of the sexes? Harrumph.
Brits get titles wrong too…
To be fair, it’s not only non-Brits who get it wrong. The beloved late author, Mary Stewart, actually had a title. Her husband, Frederick, a professor at the University of Edinburgh, was knighted in 1974. That made him Sir Frederick Stewart. It made her Lady Stewart. It did not make her “Lady Mary”, though I have heard that used by a number of British people who should have known better.
She could be “Mary, Lady Stewart” if necessary, especially to distinguish her from any other wives of knights with the surname Stewart, but the title “Lady Mary” belongs only to the daughter of an earl, or higher, in the aristocracy. Think “Lady Mary” in Downton Abbey. She has that title because her dad is an earl. (Daughters of viscounts or barons are not entitled to be called “Lady Forename”. They are “honourables” only.)
Choosing a title can be a minefield for an author, I admit. Especially if the character in question is a sibling, or more distant male relative, or—horrors!—a female relative of the holder of the aristocratic title. Downton Abbey gives an excellent example of how difficult it can be. There, the [male] heir presumptive to the earldom, Matthew Crawley, has no title at all but is still the heir unless the Earl of Grantham has a son of his own.
When is a dowager not a dowager?
As an example of the title minefield, when is it correct to name a female character as “the Dowager Lady X”?
Surely it’s straightforward? Isn’t a dowager the wife of a peer, once she is a widow?
Um, not exactly. The widow of a peer can be a dowager, but doesn’t have to be. And in some cases, it can be plain wrong.
Let me explain.
The word “dowager” can be used to distinguish the widow of a peer from the wife of the current peer (quite possibly her son). So, as long as my Duke of Calder remains unmarried, his widowed mother is not the Dowager Duchess of Calder; she remains simply the Duchess of Calder. And it is, formally, wrong to call her a dowager.
However, the moment the new duke marries, his wife becomes the Duchess of Calder and his mother can no longer use that title. She becomes either the Dowager Duchess of Calder or, if she prefers, Mary, Duchess of Calder. Some ladies, in that situation, absolutely refuse to use the title “dowager”. Maybe it’s all those associations with the dowager’s hump?
If I’m giving my character a title, how do I know if it’s right?
I don’t suggest that I always get titles right in my books but I do always try to. And I always check. My Go-To source for checking is a tattered secondhand copy of Titles and Forms of Address (6th edition) published in 1944. As you can see here, the front cover is not well attached to my book 😉 All the pages are there, though. Including the one which asserts that the book’s printing conformed with the “authorised economy standards” of the time. Well, it was wartime.
The book, in the same stable as Who’s Who, is now in its 23rd edition and still available. I haven’t checked out the most recent edition, but I certainly wouldn’t be without my own,
Invaluable, I’d say. And a worthwhile investment.
Perhaps the author of my sexy adventure should invest in one?
Very informative, Joanna. And on the dowager question, I recall that on the Duke of Kent’s marriage to the lovely Katherine Worsley (whose Desert Island Disc I was listening to last night), his mother refused to take the title dowager, choosing instead to return to her previous title Princess Marina.
I remember Princess Marina. Liz. She was so beautiful and elegant. I’m not at all surprised she opted out of Dowagerhood.
I never knew she had the choice, though. I’m so glad she did!
Yes, Princess Marina could do that because she’d been a princess in her own right, I think. If she hadn’t been, she could have opted for Marina, Duchess of Kent.
Thank you for this Joanna, admirably clear and well-explained. I had never focused on the potential multiplicity of Lady Aikenheads but of course you are absolutely right.
PS I am strongly tempted to write a story about Too Many Duchesses.
Can we have Too Many Duchesses, please????
I am absolutely with you here on wanting to throw books with incorrect use of titles at the wall. Recently I’ve come across a couple where Dame Jane Smith was referred to as Dame Smith and another where a knight was Sir Smith.
Like you, my Titles & Forms of Address is an old one – luckily before Utility regs so the paper and binding are holding up well!
Yes, those with Sir Smith drive me up the wall, too, Louise. And at the end of the sexy adventure I was referencing, there was a planned wedding with no licence. I was waiting for the vicar to say “where’s the licence” but the adventure took over and the wedding didn’t happen. But, honestly, sometimes it’s so very aggronoying…
My head hurts! Great article though, Joanne, thank you.
😉
Oh, thank you for posting this! It’s one of THE most common things that writers who otherwise pride themselves on their research, get wrong. Sharing it all over the place. (in case it amuses anyone, this is my list of the full Top Ten of things people get wrong: https://emmadarwin.substack.com/p/itchy-bitesized-34-ten-things-that
Also, the Sayers example is one I use a lot, with an admixture of Georgette Heyer. In that post, I said, “If you don’t know why novelist Harriet Vane’s married name is Lady Peter Wimsey, when her married sister-in-law is Lady Mary Parker, but the wife of Sir Harry Smith is Juana, Lady Smith, then please don’t put a famous general or a duke’s offspring in your novel”
I love your post comment which is so absolutely on the money.
Thanks for this, Emma. And for sharing the post.
Forwarding this to the printer…. Thank you
Thanks Sara
Thank you – it’s an invaluable guide. The only ones I knew for certain was “Lady Leo” (like you, because of Busman’s Honeymoon) and “Lady Stewart”. I didn’t know Mary Stewart’s husband was a knight – but it’s been driving me mad lately to hear all the talk about “Lady Victoria Beckham”!
Yes, I heard that too and shouted at the TV at the time. No NO she is NOT Lady Victoria anything.
Thanks for the reminder, Joanna. I confess its something I need to check every time, just to be sure!
You’re not the only one, Sarah. I always need to check, too. Blessing the little battered book…