GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2011-05 > 1306863028
From: Graham Milne <>
Subject: Re: re HRH Catherine Duchess of Cambridge
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 10:30:28 -0700 (PDT)
On May 29, 10:42 am, Isabelle <> wrote:
> On May 1, 6:02 pm, madscientist66 <> wrote:
> > On May 1, 12:37 am, "Leo" <> wrote:
> > > Thanks to William Addams Reitwiesner and Michael J. Wood, I have been
> > > able to record some 6,441 ancestors for Kate Middleton.
> > > Well, with all of that there must be someone at gen-medieval who can
> > > improve on Leo, and find royalty in the lineage of HRH Catherine,
> > > Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn and Baroness
> > > Carrickfergus.
> > > ap
> > > -------Amongst the 6,441 ancestors there are quite a few monarchs.
> > > Charles VI of France, Edward III of England, Charles V of France, Edward II of England, Jean II of France, Edward I of England, Philippe IV of France, John the Blind of Bohemia, Henry III of England, Philippe III of France, Enrique I of Navarre, Charles II of Naples, Emperor Heinrich VII, Pedro III of Aragon, Afonso IV of Portugal, John of England, Alfonso IX of Leon, Llywellyn Fawr of Wales, Emperor Jean de Brienne, Louis VIII of France, and many more, don't forget William the Conqueror and Charlemagne..
> > > As she also descends from Mary Boleyn, there is a chance she also descends from Henry VIII, Henry VII and Edward IV of England.
> > > A few years ago Ian Fettes and I produced a book "Plantagenet Cousins" a collection of descendants of Geoffrey of Anjou (father of King Henry II) and Catherine Middleton is one of those descendants.
> > > With best wishes,
> > > Leo van de Pas,
> > > Canberra, Australia
> > Hi Leo....yep, as you said, that group and many, many more. That's
> > what really annoys me about the term "commoner". For quite sometime,
> > it's almost been a derogatory term used for people who many in the
> > aristocracy thought were lower than a gutter snake, in their opinions.
> > Even today, it's almost a quaint term of derision, though its
> > strictest derivation just meant anyone not of royal or noble blood.
> > Funny how the media played it up with Kate before her marriage to
> > William and even on the day, yet the lady is William's 15th cousin and
> > has just as much "royal" blood flowing through her veins as he has
> > (albeit a little earlier in her tree than his).
> > Cheers,
> > Carl.
> I know this is rather off-topic, but I have to disagree with you Carl.
> The term "commoner" is not derogatory at all. The problem is that most
> people in the media have no idea what the term means.. A commoner in
> the UK is anyone who is neither the Sovereign nor a peer, according to
> British law. It has nothing to do with bloodline or social class.
> Until the morning of the wedding, Prince William of Wales was as much
> a commoner as Catherine Middleton, since he did not hold a peerage in
> his own right until then. Now that he is the Duke of Cambridge, he is
> no longer a "commoner", but his brother Prince Harry and his aunt The
> Princess Royal are still commoners. When Prince Harry marries, if he
> receives a peerage, then he will no longer be a commoner.. but The
> Princess Anne will be a commoner until she dies because she will never
> hold a peerage.
> The term also applies to all family members of any peer of the realm
> who do not hold the title in their own right, including wives, heirs
> and other children holding courtesy titles. So technically, HRH The
> Duchess of Cambridge is still a commoner.. as is HRH The Duchess of
> Cornwall and HRH The Countess of Wessex. They derive their titles from
> their husbands, and are not peers themselves.
> Commoners in the nobility, such as the Earl of Arundel and Surrey
> (heir of the Duke of Norfolk), the Lord Seymour (heir of the Duke of
> Somerset) and the Marquess of Tavistock (heir of the Duke of Bedford),
> do hold courtesy titles but do not hold those in their own right. They
> will be commoners until they inherit those dukedoms. The same goes for
> hereditary Marquessates, Earldoms and Baronies.
> Life peers are not commoners either. Even though those titles cannot
> be inherited, they are still considered members of the nobility and
> since they do hold the title in their own right, they are not
> commoners. These are people such as Baron Renwick of Clifton, Baroness
> Howells of St Davids, Baron Walker of Aldringham and Baroness Kinnock
> of Holyhead.
> It really is a simple division: Sovereign, Peers, Commoners. As stated
> above it has nothing to do with what social status is held. Obviously,
> Prince William has always been royal, and Catherine Middleton is not.
> Their social status notwithstanding, they were both commoners.. The
> Lady Diana Spencer was a commoner as the Earl Spencer's daughter AND
> as The Princess of Wales.
> Its the ignorant media that insinuates something derogatory in the
> term, and uses it for sensationalism in the press.
No, you have left one group out. Commoners are all those who are not
either peers or the sovereign or members of the royal family who are
princes or princesses (i.e. bearing the title 'Royal Highness').
Prince William has therefore never been a commoner.
Also, a person can sit in the House of Lords and be a commoner e.g.
bishops, who are Lords of Parliament but not peers.
|Re: re HRH Catherine Duchess of Cambridge by Graham Milne <>|