I feel sure that someone in my circle will know this

[luzula]

I mean, what with the historians and the Age of Sail fans, etc.

Question for fic purposes: how do British titles work if someone has both a military rank (captain, major, colonel, etc), and they are either 1) in some knightly order, and thus should be addressed as Sir, or 2) they have titles (such as "Lord X") because of their birth or because they have been ennobled.

Are these titles ever combined, does one supersede the other, or are they somehow kept separate?

I note that Broster has military officers talk about the Duke of Cumberland as His Royal Highness even though he of course has a military rank. Likewise the Earl of Loudoun is always Lord Loudoun and never General Campbell. This would seem to suggest that titles of type 2) always supersede military rank, even within the military? Primary documents always talk about Lord George Murray and don't use his military rank, which supports this. What about 1), though?

(Yes, I will in fact be having Keith knighted in one of my stories...)

Comments

[ysilme]

I'm afraid I don't have any sources or definite knowledge, but anything I can remember from any reading, uni included (I had modern history as a minor) supports no. 2, that indeed the noble rank (do you call it like that in English?) always supersedes the military title, although I think I have seen one or two occasions where it was "General Lord Thisandthat", but if I remember right those cases have been in biographies or historic textbooks, and it was necessary to name the rank for clarification. I'm not entirely sure about 1), as all sources I can remember are fictional so I don't know how reliable they are. But according to these (the Richard Bolitho series, all I can remember at the moment) have him addressed as "Sir Richard" instead of admiral, but always in contexts where he is known.

[luzula]

Thanks for the input! : ) Your "General Lord" example agrees with comments below saying that titles should be in reverse order of precedence, if both are used.

[desireearmfeldt]

I don't think noble and military titles are ever combined (you wouldn't say "Lord General" or "His Royal Highness Captain" unless you were listing out all someone's credentials at once, and then I'm not sure what you'd do. Possibly something like, "His Royal Highness, the Duke of Cumberland, Captain of the Coldstream Guards."

For noble titles alone, I believe you generally refer to/address someone by their highest title if they have multiple ones. My instinct tentatively agrees with yours that a noble title supersedes a military one (e.g. "Lord Marlborough" rather than "General Churchill," though that's a bit later in time). I'm less sure the rule would hold for people whose only title is a knighthood, though.

I also have some instinct that within the military you still might refer to your own officers as "the general" or "the captain" or whatever, though you might also refer to them by title. Less confident about whether soldiers *address* their noble officers as e.g., "captain" vs. "my lord." It's also possible the rules work differently for fellow officers vs. enlisted men.

All this is my sense from reading a bunch of British stuff from different time periods over my life, no sources were consulted in the writing of this comment.

[desireearmfeldt]

(Not to be confused with Bujold's Vorkosigan Saga, where the Barrayarans definitely do tack military and noble titles together).

[vatine]

Also, it is entirely possible to refer to someone as Sir Firstname Lord Blah, as the Sirness (or Dameness) attach to the first name, and the other title to the surname.

That would probably, though, be in an introduction context, maybe nort a full title recitation. Or in an ambiguity-busting situation, as there are cases where you have multiple "Title Blah" (depending, of course, on the exact title).

[luzula]

Thanks for the input! I think I got a definitive answer below (that titles should be in reverse order of precedence, if both are used).

I think someone of lower rank just says "yes sir", and not "yes captain", or whatever the rank is. : )

[killclaudio]

I know of a few modern Brits who combine their professional and noble titles, like Professor Lord Robert Winston, and it always seems to be professional title first. So the most natural sounding thing to me would be 'Captain Sir Keith Windham', but there are probably all kinds of arcane rules that I don't know.

[luzula]

This agrees with the comment below! : )

[weevil]

Titles are in reverse order of precedence, and both knighthoods and hereditary titles outrank professional qualifications/roles.

In this case it would be "Major Sir Keith Windham" if written down or formally announced.

[luzula]

Thanks, that was clear and helpful! : )

[feroxargentea]

Military rank then title, if you're going to use both, as in Admiral Lord Keith of Aubreyad and RL fame :)

(Meanwhile, my calling my ginger cat "Mister Sir Esca", or Mister Sir for short, makes no sense at all, except that it suits him.)

[desireearmfeldt]

But would you ever address someone with both titles at once? Like, "Good day, Admiral My Lord?"

(Not to be confused with Lord Admiral being its own title/position...I guess it's technically Lord High Admiral, but I've heard it in Victorian context shortened to Lord Admiral. Not sure how you address one to his face, though.)

Or refer to them that way if you weren't formally introducing them by all their titles (either in person or in print) or identifying them to a third party for the first time?

[feroxargentea]

I don't think you would? You'd just say "Good day, my lord." And if mentioning them to a third party, "Lord X" or "Admiral X". And the Lord High Admiral you'd probably address as "your royal highness", except he's currently dead...

[luzula]

Thanks! : )

Hee, I shall ponder which nonsense titles would best suit the cat I'm living with (currently lying beside me on the couch).

[regshoe]

I don't know—other than that 'title supersedes military rank' sounds about right as far as my experience goes—but I'm intrigued about Keith's knighthood... :D

[luzula]

It's in the story I'm currently writing! So you will soon see. : )

[hyarrowen]

Keith as a knight! What an absolutely lovely idea.

It would be rank first, then title. cf Captain Sir Thomas Moore, who raised over 30 million GBP for charity in 2020 at the height of the pandemic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Tom_Moore I believe he was also made an honorary Colonel of a new Army training centre but still used his WW2 rank instead, on the grounds that he'd earned that. LOL.

(The Queen knighted him in a special ceremony at Windsor with her father's sword, which was a very nice touch.)

Once you get above knights, I honestly have no clue. Probably reading Georgette Heyer's "An Infamous Army" would give you some ideas. His Staff was full of titled young things.

[luzula]

I knew you would like the idea of Keith being knighted. : ) Although as I said in email, I understand if you won't read it given how tragic the story is.

Thanks for the input on title usage!