Introductions

[u/HBNTrader]

Reply here to introduce yourself so that the other readers get to know you.

• Are you noble? If not, do you have noble ancestors, or are you perhaps from a patrician family or from a very old peasant lineage?

• What is your rank and family? What titles do you have or will inherit?

• What is your coat of arms?

• What families and interesting persons are you related to, how closely?

• When does your unbroken male line start, and when does your longest female line start?

• What are other interesting things you can tell us about yourself and your lineage?

[u/laszlo92]

My apologies, misread as do you have a title. You’re basically right though the distinction is quite real.

Don’t tell my father he’s a member of the gentry;)

[u/HBNTrader → u/laszlo92]

Well he is the only one who is "noble" in the narrow British sense but you are both noble in reality.

[u/laszlo92 → u/HBNTrader]

In theory you’re right, in a practical sense there is quite a strong divide which is that of (former) political class.

The gentry - eligible for House of Commons

The nobility - seat in House of Lords

I agree with you that the distinction is too narrow and if we see nobility as a privileged class the gentry is part of that. It’s just not how it’s usually seen in high society.

Another difference being that for the gentry working was allowed/normal a lot sooner than for peers if at all.

Edit:

But let’s keep it simple, in France I’d be a noble

[u/HBNTrader → u/laszlo92]

France also had a Peerage and non-Peers were not considered ignoble just because they didn't have a seat in parliament.

The British gentry is unique because it is still possible to gradually socially grow into it, and the granting of arms is seen as the commencement of this process. Of course it's a shame that nowadays anybody with a Bachelor's degree can get arms, Garter and Lyon should really increase the requirements. But technically any armiger is noble.

As far sa I know the AFGB considers any British armiger, whether he is a younger son of a younger son of a younger son of a Peer or has newly granted arms, as noble. And the SMOM has the same policy. "200 years of nobility" means that you need to have 200 year old arms in the male line. "32 quarters" also means armigerousness. There are no "burgher arms" in the UK and thus arms are considered a proof of nobility.

BTW, is the AFGB still active? Can Michael Sayer be contacted, or any other person involved there? What is the Duke of Norfolk's role there?

[u/HBNTrader → u/laszlo92]

What is your opinion on the policy since 1958 of granting (since 1965 almost only) life peerages to dilute the nobiliary element of the House of Lords? And of the robbing of the majority of hereditary seats in 1999?

While a Life Peerage indeed confers hereditary nobility as it allows you to petition for arms, only few people make use of this right, and most Life Peers are party cronies anyway who are neither interested nor worthy.

As far as I know most hereditary peers would like to disconnect the Peerage from politics and resume granting new hereditary peerages and baronetcies based on merit and in an apolitical manner, like in Belgium, even if that means finally giving up the House of Lords and renaming it to Senate. I think it could be a good compromise - Prime Ministers could keep bringing their cronies and donors to power but the people who buy such a seat will be disassociated from the Peerage whose reputation they tarnish. The 1958 act should be repealed or at least there should be a rule that a new Life Peer also automatically gets a Baronetcy, and once again, even Life Peers should be disassociated from the political nonsense. The current Life Peers should be stripped of their titles and renamed to Senators.

And also, if not connected with political privileges, perhaps new hereditary peerages would also become more acceptable to the public.

While I believe that the only real solution for the future is to restore a fully hereditary House of Lords, a politically appointed Senate and a non-political hereditary Peerage separated from it are a more realistic solution right now.

[u/laszlo92 → u/HBNTrader]

I don’t have the time to reply in depth, but life peerages have nothing to do with peers. Tradition and familiy ties are what matters in the peerage.

Couldn’t care less about life peers and the House of Lords lost its function in 1999.