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

[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. : )