Correct Forms of Address

I provide the following summary charts for your convenience, with three important caveats:

1.  Please do not use this page in a vacuum.  Most of the usages listed here are explained in greater detail elsewhere in these pages, which is why I have resisted including charts at all until now.  These charts are for convenience and reference. 

2. Most of the information on this page comes directly from the 1932 edition of Black's Correct Form.   Books like this which purport to demonstrate "correct forms of address" are aimed at a specific audience:  commoners, i.e., those of us who were not raised "in the system" and haven't married into it.  Usage among families and social equals could vary considerably from what is presented here, for all I know.   Furthermore, I'm not even certain that period letters and memoirs help, because there could be different forms for (even informal) writing and in speech, and forms of course further vary in correspondence depending upon the recipient.  Until a peer's daughter joins the Heyer Mailing List and tells me what's what, I welcome corrections on anything on this page from anyone in a position to know better, especially from first-hand experience.

3. These charts assume for illustrative purposes that eldest sons of peers bear a courtesy title only one degree lower than their father's, but that is not always the case. 

Specific Usages

1.  First Names 

First names were almost never used in speech, except in extremely limited circumstances, before this century.  I have studied memoirs and letters of the late 18th/early 19th centuries and have formed a tentative hypothesis that use of first names was resticted almost exclusively to children growing up together, or in some cases boys at school together.  They would continue to use their childhood forms of address throughout their lives.  Parents might also ignore titles when addressing their children, but very often if there was a title available, say an eldest son's courtesy title, even a mother would use it, albeit alone, e.g., Hartington.  In Lady Harriet Cavendish's letters to her family, she always refers to her brother, the Marquis of Hartington, as "Hart" or "Hartington," as did their mother.   She calls her cousin, Lady Caroline Ponsonby, "Caro" or "Caroline," as she likewise called her half-sister, Caroline de St. Jules.   She also calls many of the Lambs by their first names.  They were all raised together.  (Both Carolines married Lambs, and so after their marriages Lady Harriet would distinguish between them as "Caro-William" and "Caro-George," respectively.)  But Lady Harriet never refers to anyone outside this close circle of people she knew from infancy by their Christian names;  she always uses their correct titles.  (However, these references are in written correspondence, and may or may not reflect the terms used in actual speech.)

Among men, rather than first names, intimacy was usually shown by using the title alone, e.g., Sherringham, Wrotham (or some diminutive of it, like "Sherry" or "Hart"), or by using the last name alone, e.g., Fairfax.  Occasionally first names were used among very close friends who, as mentioned above, attended boarding school together from a young age, especially if the boy didn't have the peerage while he was in school, but inherited it later (which is why Lord Wrotham's friends call him "George," while they call Lord Sherringham "Sherry":  Sherry had already inherited his peerage when he met them all in school, while George inherited his after they had all grown up). 

Even spouses often maintained more formal modes of address than Christian names, even in private.  Most often a lady would call her husband by his title alone, as his intimate friends or his family would, e.g., Chatham.  Obviously it would depend upon the couple, and many factors might contribute, such as age disparity or actual intimacy, but a wife would almost always refer to her husband this way, even to her closest friends and relations, and in company they would call each other "my lord" and "my lady," or perhaps some diminutive like "my dear" or "my love."  It is hard to identify sources to back up this hypothesis, since primary sources from earlier centuries generally do not include transcripts of conversations, but I really believe that a much more formal level of discourse was maintained than what is portrayed in romance novels.

2.  "Social" vs. "Formal" Correspondence

I am not certain exactly what the difference is between "social" and "formal" correspondence.  Presumably "formal" correspondence is any address made to a peer in his capacity as a member of the government or of the House of Lords, or as a landlord or capitalist.  Presumably "social" correspondence includes invitations to social events and letters between friends.  But what if a friend or fellow peer writes on a political subject?  Which rule prevails?  What about when writing socially to a family connection one has not met (for example, Miss Taverner writing to Lord Worth, or Mr. Collins writing to Mr. Bennet)?   Is there ever a social event that is considered so "formal" that it requires addressing the invitations in a "formal" manner, and announcing arrivals "formally"-- Royal Drawing Rooms and coronations come to mind.  What about invitations to an evening at Prinny's Brighton Pavilion or at Carlton House?  Were other social events, such as balls and assemblies, considered in terms of address more formal than routs or Venetian breakfasts or morning calls?   In other words, is there a difference in the way a servant would announce a morning caller vs. how the same servant would announce the same person at a ball?  And when, before this century, did a peeress ever receive "formal" correspondence?

3.  Use of "The Honourable"

"The Honourable" is a title which applies to younger sons of earls and all children of viscounts and barons (and the wives of those sons).   However, it is used only on envelopes, and is never spoken, even by a servant, or used in the salutation of a letter.  It is not even included on calling cards.  (A person is announced by servants according to the name on his calling card.)  Thus it is impossible to know, merely upon introduction, that a person ranks as an Honourable.   Black says that "[w]hen it is desired to indicate it, however, a reference to the holder's parentage would be permissible."

4.  Use of "The"

"The" is a designation only used for peers and their families.  It is not used, for example, by baronets, knights, or commoners (except when referring to the widow of a baronet).  The wife of a baronet or knight would be Lady Burke, and never The Lady Burke, while the wife of a peer would be The Lady Melgum, and a peer's daughter who is entitlted to use the "Lady" designation would be The Lady Serena Carlow.  However, when the usage is not formal, "The" may be dropped.  (I am not absolutely certain whether this "The" usage is appropriate for the eldest sons (heirs) and their wives and children, but I think it is, since courtesy titles are supposed to be used exactly as if they held the title by right.)

5.  Use of "Miss," "Mr." and "Mrs." With and Without Christian Names 

When "Miss" is used alone with a surname, it refers to the eldest unmarried daughter.  Other daughters must be distinguished by using their Christian names.  For example, Miss Bennet, Miss Elizabeth Bennet, Miss Mary Bennet, Miss Catherine Bennet, Miss Lydia Bennet.  Or, collectively, the Misses Bennet.   In conversation, where none of her sisters are present, a younger sister may be addressed as Miss Bennet.  If Jane and Lizzie are standing together, however, they are addressed as Miss Bennet and Miss Elizabeth.

When "Mr." is used alone with a surname, it refers to the eldest son (of a Viscount, baron, or commoner).  His younger brothers are distinguished from him in speech by using their Christian names, similarly to the use of "Miss."   Their wives adopt precisely the same usage, only with "Mrs." instead of "Mr."  Mr. Plowden is the eldest son, and Mrs. Plowden is his wife;   Mr. Thomas Plowden is a younger son, and Mrs. Thomas Plowden is his wife. 

6. Use of "Miss," "Mr." and "Mrs." With "The Honourable"

In writing, "Mr." and "Miss" are never used in conjunction with "The Honourable."  The address on the envelope to the eldest Mr. Plowden would be "To The Honble. James Plowden."  An envelope to his wife would be "To The Honble. Mrs. Plowden."  Her husband's Christian name is left out, to denote that he is the eldest;  and unlike "Mr." and "Miss," using "Mrs." in conjunction with "The Honourable" is correct.  But this couple would be announced as "Mr. Plowden" and "Mrs. Plowden" (separately), or "Mr. and Mrs. Plowden" (together).

However, in Persuasion, Austen introduces Sir Walter's exalted cousins, the Dowager Viscountess Dalrymple and her daughter, thus: 

"The Bath paper one morning announced the arrival of the Dowager Viscountess Dalrymple, and her daughter, the Honourable Miss Carteret. . . "

and, a little later:

"they had the cards of Dowager Viscountess Dalrymple, and the Hon. Miss Carteret, to be arranged wherever they might be most visible;  and 'Our cousins in Laura-place,' -- 'Our cousins, Lady Dalrymple and Miss Carteret,' were talked of to everybody."

(Vol. II, Chapter iv)

So it is not clear when this rule about never using "Miss" with "The Hon." evolved.  Or perhaps the rule only applies to addressing envelopes, and not to newsprint.  But Black clearly states that the rule applies to calling cards.

7.  Titles in Speech

In speech, with a few rare exceptions for extremely formal occasions, all ranks below duke are called "Lord" and "Lady" in speech, and never their titles.  For example, "Lord and Lady Withington" rather than "The Earl and Countess of Withington."  The titles would never be used in intimate speech, even when referring to them.

Dukes

The rule is that a social inferior addresses him as "Your Grace" and a social equal as "Duke."  I have not been able to discover where precisely the line is drawn to distinguish social inferiors from equals.  Obviously it is not drawn at the dukes themselves.  My tentative hypothesis is that a "social equal" is anyone who is a peer or a member of a peer's family.  A lower line might be drawn at baronets, knights, or gentlemen, but I think that the connotation of the word "peer" lends itself to drawing the line at barons.  So Miss Anne Elliot would address a duke as "Your Grace," while her cousin, Miss Carteret, would call him "Duke."

Also, the salutation of formal correspondence to a duke is "My Lord Duke."  But he is never called "my lord." 

This is example is the Duke of Glastonbury, who holds the secondary title Marquess of Tenwhestle, and whose family surname of Drake.

Married Daughters of Dukes

When a daughter of a duke marries a peer or the heir to a duke or marquess, she takes the title of her husband (even though her precedence is above his).  But when she marries a commoner, a baronet, or the heir to an earl, viscount, or baron, she may, if she chooses, retain her "Lady <Firstname>" title.  If she is married to an heir to a peerage, she may only keep this form until her husband inherits his peerage, at which time she loses her own precedence and acquires that of her husband, even if it means she will move down several slots on the Table of Precedence.  Note that even if she marries the younger son of a duke, she retains her own precedence, because daughters of dukes rank one degree higher than younger sons of dukes, and one degree lower than eldest sons of dukes (a ranking which is preserved in the lesser ranks of the peerage as well). 

Marquesses

The Marquess of Mallen holds a subsidiary title, the Earl of Dunlop, and the family name is Weston.

Married Daughters of Marquesses

When a daughter of a marquess marries a peer or the heir to a duke or marquess, she takes the title of her husband (even though her precedence is above his).  But when she marries a commoner, a baronet, or the heir to an earl, viscount or baron, she may, if she chooses, retain her "Lady <Firstname>" title.  If she is married to an heir to a peerage, she may only keep this form until her husband inherits his peerage, at which time she loses her own precedence and acquires that of her husband, even if it means she will move down several slots on the Table of Precedence.  Note that even if she marries the younger son of a marquess, she retains her own precedence, because daughters of marquesses rank one degree higher than younger sons of marquesses, and one degree lower than eldest sons of marquesses (a ranking which is preserved in the lesser ranks of the peerage as well).

Earls

Here we have the Earl of Withington, who is also Viscount Munthorpe, and a family name of Grisham.

Married Daughters of Earls

When a daughter of an earl marries a peer or the heir to a duke or marquess, she takes the title of her husband (even though her precedence is above his).  But when she marries a commoner, a baronet, or the heir to a viscount or baron, she may, if she chooses, retain her "Lady <Firstname>" title.  If she is married to an heir to a peerage, she may only keep this form until her husband inherits his peerage, at which time she loses her own precedence and acquires that of her husband, even if it means she will move down several slots on the Table of Precedence.  Note that even if she marries the younger son of an earl, she retains her own precedence, because daughters of earls rank one degree higher than younger sons of earls, and one degree lower than eldest sons of marquesses (a ranking which is preserved in the lesser ranks of the peerage as well).

Viscounts

Viscount Newton and Baron Sunderley, surname Pratt.

Married Daughters of Viscounts

If she marries a rank equal or above her own, she takes the rank of her husband.  If she marries below her own, she keeps her rank.

Barons

Our example is Baron Featherstone, surname Stanley.

Married Daughters of Barons

If she marries a rank equal or above her own, she takes the rank of her husband.  If she marries below her own, she keeps her rank.

Baronets

Married Daughters of Baronets

Since she has no distinctions of her own, she takes the rank of her husband. 

If a younger son of an earl, viscount, or baron is given a baronetcy, then he is allowed to keep his "Honorable" designation in addition to his new "Sir" dignity for the addressing of envelopes, e.g., The Honble. Sir William Lucas, Bt., and The Honble. Lady Lucas.  But since the title "Honorable" is never used in speech or even on calling cards, the forms of announcing and addressing in speech remain the same as for an ordinary baronet.

On to The 1st Duke of Marlborough

If you dispute a fact from these pages, please contact me, and if you can, provide a contradicting source. These pages are a work in progress and I expect them to change in the future, although what I present today is as accurate as I can make it.

Laura A. Wallace
laura@chinet.com
12 June 2004

Table of Contents

Peerage Basics
Hereditary Peerages, including Royal Titles
Life Peerages
Courtesy Titles
Rights and Privileges of Peers
Precedence
A Peeress "in her own right"
Dowager Peeresses
Entails, Marriage Settlements, and Dower
Almack's (coming soon!)
Biographical Details of Real Regency People (coming soon!)
Correct Forms of Address
The 1^st Duke of Marlborough
Links to other Sites
Bibliography
Notes