Rosie J. Wrote:
> *I'm not sure that's strictly true of nobility.
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a
> nobleman's daughter retains the precedence she was
> born to if she marries lower. She certainly
> retains the title she was born to if she marries
> lower, which is why Lady Catherine is Lady
> Catherine and not Lady de Bourgh. (If she marries
> higher, she takes higher precedence and whatever
> title comes with her husband.)
It depends on if a substantive peerage is involved. If a nobleman's daughter marries a man who holds a peerage title, even if that peerage is a lower order than her father's, she would use the title derived from her husband. If Lady Catherine had married a baron (the lowest order in the peerage) whose title was Baron XYZ, she'd be called Lady XYZ and never Lady Catherine. Because de Bourgh was either a baronet or a knight and not a peer, she kept the higher courtesy designation of Lady Catherine since it was derived from her father's peerage.
> *I'm not sure that's strictly true of nobility.
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a
> nobleman's daughter retains the precedence she was
> born to if she marries lower. She certainly
> retains the title she was born to if she marries
> lower, which is why Lady Catherine is Lady
> Catherine and not Lady de Bourgh. (If she marries
> higher, she takes higher precedence and whatever
> title comes with her husband.)
It depends on if a substantive peerage is involved. If a nobleman's daughter marries a man who holds a peerage title, even if that peerage is a lower order than her father's, she would use the title derived from her husband. If Lady Catherine had married a baron (the lowest order in the peerage) whose title was Baron XYZ, she'd be called Lady XYZ and never Lady Catherine. Because de Bourgh was either a baronet or a knight and not a peer, she kept the higher courtesy designation of Lady Catherine since it was derived from her father's peerage.