Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 7 of 13     «   Prev   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   Next   »
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #91 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
For the umpteenth time, lying troll, no one is claiming you're not entitled to use the surname of your maternal family. They are claiming that being entitled to use the surname of your maternal family does not make you noble even if they are, surnames and nobility being distinct things transmitted by different methods. As for the grant of arms, it has barely been mentioned by anyone but you. But normally an armigerous person would not thereby be enabled to grant his arms to other people, even family. He may transmit those arms through descent from him, but that is another matter.

However, heraldry not being really my thing, and (as with nobility) different rules prevailing in different jurisdictions, I would not be prepared to categorically state that you have no right to the arms. I do categorically state that you are not a nobleman, on account of you aren't, and I'm afraid you'll just have to put up with it. Moanings and whinings about your precious 'identity' won't alter the facts of the case.

The old rules don't matter today, because they were abolished by the Weimar Republic.
I consider a person, who is entitled to use the trappings of nobility, such as titles of nobility, according to the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany, a nobleman, even if he isn't a nobleman according to Salic law. You support upholding the rules, which were abolished by the Weimar Republic. I'm opposed to upholding the rules, which were abolished by the Weimar Republic. The Federal Republic of Germany is neutral in our dispute, because it doesn't recognize the status of nobility, despite recognizing titles of nobility, such as Graf and Freiherr, as parts of the legal name. I consider myself a nobleman, but you don't have to consider me a nobleman. Let's agree to disagree on this matter.
Wessexman and Aaron Traas have claimed that me using the surname of my maternal family is comparable to a person, who is unrelated to my maternal family, taking the surname of my maternal family. That's an assault on my identity.
Claiming that I'm not entitled to use the coat of arms of my maternal family is wrong, because the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany don't prohibit my maternal uncle from granting me the right to use the coat of arms of my maternal family. 



Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,845
Reply with quote  #92 
You are not a nobleman. You keep making inconsistent use of phrases like recognising titles, but not noble status. The Federal Republic of Germany does neither, as far as I can see and as far as you have proven. What it does is allow the names of the titles to be used as part, even if a special part, of a surname. But they aren't true titles any longer, but simply surnames. Having one, even through legitimate inheritance, doesn't necessarily make anyone noble. You are a commoner.

And you are either experiencing difficulties in comprehension or being dishonest when you talk about comparing you to just anyone changing their surname to your surname. The comparisons were not to say you were exactly like this, but reductios to see what were the limiting or distinguishing principles.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,500
Reply with quote  #93 
So you claim to be titled because a jurisdiction which doesn't recognise titles of nobility changed the rules regarding transmission of something it doesn't recognise the existence of. There is no 'agreement to disagree'. That happens when two parties have conflicting views which are both defensible by argument. In this case only mine is, and yours is patently absurd. In short, troll, I am right and you are wrong. I don't think for a moment that either gentleman was assaulting your identity. They were using an analogy to illustrate a point. Although they will have been sincere in this I would not (and did not) use that particular analogy myself, because I don't think it altogether applicable.

Note that, as said before, your coat of arms has hardly been discussed apart from your incessant mentions of it. Also that I did not claim you were not entitled to use the arms. I stated that due to lack of exact knowledge I wouldn't say outright that you weren't entitled to them. If you detect a tone of doubt and scepticism there you are right, but mainly because you are such a liar about everything that I am not prepared to accept the truth of anything you say. Unless I can independently verify it, which in this case I can't. Or rather won't be making the effort to try, because I really could care less about whether you are truly armigerous or no.
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #94 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
You are not a nobleman. You keep making inconsistent use of phrases like recognising titles, but not noble status. The Federal Republic of Germany does neither, as far as I can see and as far as you have proven. What it does is allow the names of the titles to be used as part, even if a special part, of a surname. But they aren't true titles any longer, but simply surnames. Having one, even through legitimate inheritance, doesn't necessarily make anyone noble. You are a commoner.

And you are either experiencing difficulties in comprehension or being dishonest when you talk about comparing you to just anyone changing their surname to your surname. The comparisons were not to say you were exactly like this, but reductios to see what were the limiting or distinguishing principles.

I apologize for claiming that you have compared me to just anyone changing their surname to my surname. I misunderstood you. The name law of the Federal Republic of Germany has established limiting principles concerning using the surnames of noble families. It bans a person from taking the surname of a noble family, to which he or she isn't related, and it also bans a person from taking the surname of his or her distant ancestor.
The Federal Republic of Germany indeed doesn't recognize titles of nobility as such. Claiming that titles of nobility are parts of a surname in Germany is inaccurate, because they aren't considered parts of the surname proper in Germany. Titles of nobility are ignored in alphabetical sorting of names.
Claiming that titles of nobility merely are parts of the name in Germany is technically correct, but most Germans still consider them actual titles of nobility.

Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,845
Reply with quote  #95 
The point is they are parts of names and not titles, whether or not they are special parts of the surnames. In English it is the proper usage to ignore such particles, at least when the surname alone is given; e.g., you write "Tocqueville said...", not "de Tocqueville said..." This doesn't make them titles, as you yourself acknowledge. What the majority of Germans might believe (you give no evidence of this) is neither here nor there. I'm not German, but I knew von in a name signified the surname was of noble derivation; I did not assume, even before talking to you, it meant all who carry it, even if they legitimately inherited it, were noble themselves. Surnames spread much more easily than noble status, at least as understood in countries like Britain or Germany.
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #96 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
The point is they are parts of names and not titles, whether or not they are special parts of the surnames. In English it is the proper usage to ignore such particles, at least when the surname alone is given; e.g., you write "Tocqueville said...", not "de Tocqueville said..." This doesn't make them titles, as you yourself acknowledge. What the majority of Germans might believe (you give no evidence of this) is neither here nor there. I'm not German, but I knew von in a name signified the surname was of noble derivation; I did not assume, even before talking to you, it meant all who carry it, even if they legitimately inherited it, were noble themselves. Surnames spread much more easily than noble status, at least as understood in countries like Britain or Germany.

Comparing Graf and Freiherr to von is wrong, because Graf and Freiherr were actual titles of nobility before 1919. The Federal Republic of Germany legally recognize Graf and Freiherr as parts of the name rather than as titles of nobility, but they were once actual titles of nobility. That's why I claim that anybody, who legitimately has inherited those titles, is a nobleman or a noblewoman, even if he or she isn't a nobleman or a noblewoman according to Salic law.
Claiming that Graf and Freiherr aren't titles of nobility today, while claiming that the old rules concerning inheritance of the status of nobility applies today, is inconsistent. The Federal Republic of Germany doesn't distinguish between agnatic descendants of noble families and cognatic descendants of noble families today. The Federal Republic of Germany doesn't recognize anybody as a nobleman, but it recognizes the right of agnatic and cognatic descendants of noble families to use former titles of nobility as parts of their legal names.
A person, who isn't a descendant of a person, who was entitled to use a title of nobility in 1919, aren't allowed to use a former title of nobility in Germany, unless he or she is married to a person, who is entitled to use a former title of nobility as a part of his or her legal name or is adopted by a person, who is entitled to use a former title of nobility as a part of his or her legal name.
Murtagon

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 195
Reply with quote  #97 
Azadi, did you explicitly receive your current surname right after your birth or you changed it afterwards? Does your father use your mother's surname as well? And why on Earth did your uncle decide to give his name to non-agnates? Was there some sort of a quota?

As I see it, you are certainly of noble descent (unless you're lying, which I'm not quite convinced is the case), but you are not a nobleman according to the rules of the Deutsches Reich (from 1871 to 1918/19, specifically). The following republican regimes have treated everyone as equal before the law, so you're still no aristocrat, but you might be a nobleman, if only from the point of view of the Federal Republic of Germany.

I think it would be best if you simply provide us with the necessary laws and acts, which allow for that. They can be in German, I've no problem with that (I use German for a living, after all).
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #98 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murtagon
Azadi, did you explicitly receive your current surname right after your birth or you changed it afterwards? Does your father use your mother's surname as well? And why on Earth did your uncle decide to give his name to non-agnates? Was there some sort of a quota?

As I see it, you are certainly of noble descent (unless you're lying, which I'm not quite convinced is the case), but you are not a nobleman according to the rules of the Deutsches Reich (from 1871 to 1918/19, specifically). The following republican regimes have treated everyone as equal before the law, so you're still no aristocrat, but you might be a nobleman, if only from the point of view of the Federal Republic of Germany.

I think it would be best if you simply provide us with the necessary laws and acts, which allow for that. They can be in German, I've no problem with that (I use German for a living, after all).

I received my current surname right after my birth. My father took my mother's surname, when he married my mother. My parents were married in 1989. A man has been allowed to take the surname of his wife in Germany since 1977. My parents were Kurdish refugees, who met each other in Germany. My uncle didn't give me his surname. He gave my sister and I his coat of arms. My sister and I are the only non-agnatic members of the Kurdish branch of my noble family.

AaronTraas

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 537
Reply with quote  #99 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi

Wessexman and Aaron Traas have claimed that me using the surname of my maternal family is comparable to a person, who is unrelated to my maternal family, taking the surname of my maternal family. 


Wrong, I asked a question which you did not answer, instead complaining that you were sick and tired of things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi
That's an assault on my identity.


I'm sorry your identity is so frail that it is assaulted by questions, and is insulted by what strangers on the Internet think.

NOTE: If your answer is just a repeat of something you said earlier, please don't bother. It's an insult to everyone in this forum when you do that. Or maybe an assault -- you don't know if we have egos so frail and unmanly as you.
MatthewJTaylor

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 275
Reply with quote  #100 
Azadi I think your claim to German nobility is weak since you do not meet the categories for nobility held by the last government of the state to recognise a noble class.
However, I see no reason for you not to found your own Kurdish noble dynasty if you can assist in the Kurdish independence effort.
If the new Kurdistan establishes a nobility and you have worked hard for Kurdistan, you'd probably have a fair shot.
If you post the arms of your uncle here, I can try and modify them to be suitable for use of a related though distinct house for Kurdistan, not Germany.

__________________
ceterum censeo caetum europaeum delendum esse
The Scottish Tory - https://sites.google.com/view/scottishtory
Scots for a French Royal Restoration - https://sites.google.com/view/sfrr
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,500
Reply with quote  #101 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi
Claiming that Graf and Freiherr aren't titles of nobility today, while claiming that the old rules concerning inheritance of the status of nobility applies today, is inconsistent.

It would be if anyone had made such a claim. Which no one has. As usual, the thoroughly dishonest troll sets up a straw man to assail. To address other points, I am not 'convinced' the troll is lying about his ancestry. I'm just not going to take his word for it. Why should I, when he lies so much and is dishonest in so many other ways? And what would it matter anyway? His being of ever such noble blood would improve his arguments not one whit. Unless it's just that the staunch egalitarian thought we were all such dimwits that we would lie down to be trampled by anyone randomly claiming to be a nobleman.

To Matthew, you made a kind offer but I doubt the troll will provide you with his alleged arms. After all, they might enable someone to identify his family name, which his mother warned him he must never allow as it might compromise his security. Quite right too, but it's a pity she didn't bring him up nearly so well in other respects.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,845
Reply with quote  #102 
Azadi is a commoner. By this time we have thoroughly established this. Is there anyone who finds his claim persuasive by this point? His repetitive silliness is not actually helpful in him making his case. And I agree with Peter that at least sometimes it is partly purposeful, to evade the fact he has a weak position; i.e., he is being dishonest. He essentially admitted he did this to avoid answering my questions previously. Here he wishes to be known as a nobleman, which is only today a traditional title in Germany, but he wants to use non-traditional rules for doing so. This is fundamentally inconsistent. Simply having a noble surname, as he does, does not make one noble.
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #103 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
Azadi is a commoner. By this time we have thoroughly established this. Is there anyone who finds his claim persuasive by this point? His repetitive silliness is not actually helpful in him making his case. And I agree with Peter that at least sometimes it is partly purposeful, to evade the fact he has a weak position; i.e., he is being dishonest. He essentially admitted he did this to avoid answering my questions previously. Here he wishes to be known as a nobleman, which is only today a traditional title in Germany, but he wants to use non-traditional rules for doing so. This is fundamentally inconsistent. Simply having a noble surname, as he does, does not make one noble.

I don't claim to be a nobleman according to the traditional rules of the German nobility, which were abolished in 1919. I don't demand that the other members of the forum recognize me as a nobleman. I have merely explained why I consider myself a nobleman. I don't support upholding the traditional rules of the German nobility, because they are outdated. Claiming that a person, who is entitled to use a former title of nobility as a part of his name according to the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany, isn't a nobleman doesn't make sense to me. 
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #104 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murtagon
I think it would be best if you simply provide us with the necessary laws and acts, which allow for that. They can be in German, I've no problem with that (I use German for a living, after all).

An article, which proves that the son of a noblewoman and a commoner using the title of nobility of his mother is legal in Germany:
https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/staat-und-recht/gastbeitrag-adelsbezeichnung-weniger-erlauchte-namen-13758538-p2.html

Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,845
Reply with quote  #105 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi

I don't claim to be a nobleman according to the traditional rules of the German nobility, which were abolished in 1919. I don't demand that the other members of the forum recognize me as a nobleman. I have merely explained why I consider myself a nobleman. I don't support upholding the traditional rules of the German nobility, because they are outdated. Claiming that a person, who is entitled to use a former title of nobility as a part of his name according to the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany, isn't a nobleman doesn't make sense to me. 


In other words, you aren't a nobleman, but you want to be recognised as one. You are a commoner. Is there anyone here who thinks otherwise at this point?
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.