Start My Family Tree Welcome to Geni, home of the world's largest family tree.
Join Geni to explore your genealogy and family history in the World's Largest Family Tree.

British Peers and Baronets

view all

Profiles

  • Peter Malcolm King, 4th Earl of Lovelace (1905 - 1964)
    Peter Malcolm King, 4th Earl of Lovelace (1905-1964)
  • Peter King, 5th Earl of Lovelace (1951 - 2018)
    Peter King, 5th Earl of Lovelace Wikipedia Peter Axel William Locke King, 5th Earl of Lovelace styled Viscount Ockham before 1964, was a British peer. Lovelace succeeded his father, Peter King, 4th E...
  • George Rice-Trevor 4th Baron Dynevor (1795 - 1869)
    Rice-Trevor, 4th Baron Dynevor (5 August 1795 – 7 October 1869)[1] was a British peer. He was the son of George Talbot Rice, 3rd Baron Dynevor.On 27 November 1824 he married Frances Fitzroy, daughter o...
  • George Talbot Rice 3rd Baron Dynevor (1765 - 1852)
    Baron Dinevor, of Dinevor in the County of Carmarthen (usually spelt Dynevor or Dinefwr), is a title in the Peerage of Great Britain. It was created in 1780 for William Talbot, 1st Earl Talbot, with re...
  • Baroness Cecil Talbot of Dyne (1735 - 1793)
    Cecil de Cardonnel, 2nd Baroness Dynevor (July 1735 – 14 March 1793) was a Welsh peer.She was the daughter of William Talbot, 1st Earl Talbot. Her mother was the daughter and heir of Adam de Cardonnel,...

The British Peers and Baronets Project seeks to bring together all persons in (or from) the United Kingdom with hereditary titles, excluding monarchs (who are already compiled under the "English and British Monarchs" Project).

The term "British" in this context is understood to include all titled peers and baronets in the United Kingdom (this includes all of Great Britain -- England, Scotland and Wales -- and Northern Ireland). Basically, if a subject of the British Crown possessed or possesses an hereditary title, ranging anywhere from duke down to baronet, they belong in this project.

Please note that just because a person's name is preceded by "Lord" or "Lady", it is no guarantee that they are a peer or baronet; for example, the children of some peers are styled "Lord..." or "Lady...", regardless of whether they ever inherit a peerage. Nor should "hons" ("the Honourable...") be included since this prefix is merely an honorific courtesy extended to the children of some peers and is not in itself a title. Finally, the only knights ("Sir..." or "Dame...") who should be included are baronets since, while baronetcy is a species of knighthood, it is usually heritable (the exception being the 20th century practice of bestowing life-baronetcies).

Finally, one matter that's potentially complicated, but I've attempted to make less so: when we think of peers and baronets, we normally think of *men*, although there were some women who possessed titles in their own right (perhaps 3% of all titles). However, when a woman is married to a peer or baronet, or is widowed, she possesses a courtesy title equivalent to theirs. She loses her courtesy title if she is divorced or is widowed and remarries a commoner. But instead of trying to examine each woman's profile to determine if she possessed her title independently of her (titled) husband, I think it's simpler just to include the wives and widows of peers and baronets here. It's erring on the side of granting some women courtesies they're not entitled to, but I'd rather do that than exclude some that *are* entitled. It's just my opinion, but unless there's a groundswell of opinion to the contrary, we'll try it that way.

(One confusing thing that's peculiar to British titles: the wife of an earl is called a "countess", but there are no "counts" in British peerage.)

If you are not certain that an individual legitimately possessed a title, do not include them.

External links