Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 4 of 13      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   Next   »
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,442
Reply with quote  #46 
I ignored it because my response would be 'So what?'. But since you insist, so what? Unless you can show how your unnamed maternal uncle is entitled to grant nobility to family members at his whim. I believe you have made that second point before, more than once. And the reply is the same as has been made before, more than once. A surname is not a title of nobility. They are two clean different things. Now can we please give this done-to-death topic a rest?

PS in response to your edit: saying Wessexman made a false claim is a typical use of emotionally-charged and highly insulting language from you, not to mention a wild exaggeration. There is though one person on this thread definitely making a false claim. Bet you can't guess who I think it is.
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #47 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I ignored it because my response would be 'So what?'. But since you insist, so what? Unless you can show how your unnamed maternal uncle is entitled to grant nobility to family members at his whim. I believe you have made that second point before, more than once. And the reply is the same as has been made before, more than once. A surname is not a title of nobility. They are two clean different things. Now can we please give this done-to-death topic a rest?

PS in response to your edit: saying Wessexman made a false claim is a typical use of emotionally-charged and highly insulting language from you, not to mention a wild exaggeration. There is though one person on this thread definitely making a false claim. Bet you can't guess who I think it is.

A surname is of course not a title of nobility, but a German, whose father is a commoner and whose mother is a noblewoman, is entitled to use an actual title of nobility, such as Graf or Freiherr, as a part of his legal name.
The decision of a current head of a noble house matters far more than old rules, which were abolished in 1919. Claiming that the head of a noble house in a country, which doesn't recognize the nobility as a social class, isn't allowed to grant the right to use the coat of arms of the noble house to the son of his sister is similar to claiming that the head of a formerly reigning royal dynasty isn't allowed to change the law of succession to the throne.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,827
Reply with quote  #48 
I didn't claim that anyone could take your name. That's a lie. I asked why they couldn't, as you were saying it was the possession of the surname, even by yourself, who normally wouldn't have it, that makes you noble.

Here I can see nothing on the children of a noblewoman and a commoner being noble:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nobility
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #49 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
I didn't claim that anyone could take your name. That's a lie. I asked why they couldn't, as you were saying it was the possession of the surname, even by yourself, who normally wouldn't have it, that makes you noble.

Here I can see nothing on the children of a noblewoman and a commoner being noble:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nobility

I apologize. I must have misunderstood you. 
Comparing using the surname of your mother to usurping a surname, which haven't been used by any of your ancestors, or taking the surname of your distant ancestors is wrong. Using the surname of my mother is fortunately allowed in Germany, but usurping a surname or taking the surname of a distant ancestor aren't allowed in Germany.
The Federal Republic of Germany doesn't recognize the status of nobility, but children of a noblewoman and a commoner are entitled to use titles of nobility, such as Graf or Freiherr, as parts of their legal names. Claiming that a person, who is entitled to use a title of nobility as part of his legal name, isn't a nobleman, is ridiculous.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,442
Reply with quote  #50 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi
Claiming that a person, who is entitled to use a title of nobility as part of his legal name, isn't a nobleman, is ridiculous.

You mistyped something in that sentence. The word immediately after the second comma should be 'is' not 'isn't'.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,827
Reply with quote  #51 
Azadi, the point was not that it would be exactly the same if I took your name, but that you taking your mother's name is a stretch. I was making a reductio. That Germany doesn't make changing your name legally as easy as some countries, doesn't prove that this has anything to do with protecting the legitimacy of noble titles or even surnames. I think we have established the name itself is not the same as being a nobleman, as you yourself are talking now about how the children of a noblewoman and a commoner are noble. You wouldn't have to do that if it were a matter of inheriting a surname. I note you didn't, though, give the asked for proof of this. I also would like to know what noblewoman means here - whether it is only when the woman herself has a title, which is not the case here.
MatthewJTaylor

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 269
Reply with quote  #52 
If I took my grandmother's maidenname, I'd certainly have a more impressive name with a noble past but it would hardly render me a noble myself.
__________________
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
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #53 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
Azadi, the point was not that it would be exactly the same if I took your name, but that you taking your mother's name is a stretch. I was making a reductio. That Germany doesn't make changing your name legally as easy as some countries, doesn't prove that this has anything to do with protecting the legitimacy of noble titles or even surnames. I think we have established the name itself is not the same as being a nobleman, as you yourself are talking now about how the children of a noblewoman and a commoner are noble. You wouldn't have to do that if it were a matter of inheriting a surname. I note you didn't, though, give the asked for proof of this. I also would like to know what noblewoman means here - whether it is only when the woman herself has a title, which is not the case here.

The Federal Republic of Germany doesn't recognize the status of nobility, because the German nobility was abolished as a legally recognized social class in 1919. The child of a noblewoman and a commoner is entitled to use a title of nobility, such as Graf or Freiherr, as part of his or her legal name in Germany. Using the surname of a noble family doesn't make you a nobleman, but using a title of nobility, such as Graf or Freiherr, makes you a nobleman.
Claiming that using the surname of your mother is wrong is nonsense. Germans traditionally use the surname of their father, but the current laws of the Federal Republic of Germany allow using the surname of your mother. The current laws of the Federal Republic of Germany matter far more than outdated traditions.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,827
Reply with quote  #54 
No one is claiming that using your mother's surname is wrong. What they are saying is it isn't the usual way surnames are handed on in Germany and this underscores the distinction between the surname and the noble status. Again, you seem to want your cake and to eat it too: you want to be recognised as a traditional German nobleman and yet not adhered to traditional definitions when it suits.

The rest of your post is another example of proof by repetition rather than, you know, actual proof.
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #55 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
No one is claiming that using your mother's surname is wrong. What they are saying is it isn't the usual way surnames are handed on in Germany and this underscores the distinction between the surname and the noble status. The rest of your post is another example of proof by repetition.

Graf and Freiherr aren't surnames. They are titles of nobility, which can be used as part of the surname in Germany. The son of a noblewoman and a commoner can use Graf or Freiherr as part of the legal surname. A person, who use Graf or Freiherr as part of his legal surname, is a nobleman.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,827
Reply with quote  #56 
That sounds dubious. A surname is carried on in the family, normally, in Germany, in the male line. So within a few generations far more would have the title in their surname than would have been noble in the past (assuming many marry those who are commoners). As you acknowledge, as Germany no longer recognises titles of nobility, it allowing these surnames does not show all carrying them are noble.

You keep repeating the claim about the son of a noblewoman and a commoner being able to take a title, but you don't prove it. Nor do you explain what noblewoman here means, and whether your mother would qualify. I thought you were going to stop with the endless repetitions?
AaronTraas

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 528
Reply with quote  #57 
Quote:
Originally Posted by azadi

Graf and Freiherr aren't surnames. They are titles of nobility, which can be used as part of the surname in Germany. The son of a noblewoman and a commoner can use Graf or Freiherr as part of the legal surname. A person, who use Graf or Freiherr as part of his legal surname, is a nobleman.


So if I legally changed my surname to Graf von Traas, which would be legal in the US, then emigrated to Germany, would I be a nobleman?
azadi

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,474
Reply with quote  #58 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronTraas


So if I legally changed my surname to Graf von Traas, which would be legal in the US, then emigrated to Germany, would I be a nobleman?

I'm sick and tired of the other members of this forum comparing me to impostors. My surname and my coat of arms are important parts of my identity. Claiming that me using the surname of my mother is comparable to a person, which isn't descended from a noble family, usurping a title of nobility, is frankly offensive.
I'm sick and tired of the other members of this forum defending outdated rules, which have been abolished by republican governments. Peter claims that my maternal uncle isn't entitled to grant me the right to use the coat of arms of my noble house, because Germany used Salic law before abolishing the status of nobility in 1919. Peter were opposed to Vittorio Emanuele di Savoia introducing female succession to the Italian throne, because Italy used Salic law before the abolition of the Italian monarchy.
The head of a formerly reigning royal house has the right to introduce female succession to the throne, because the old law of succession to the throne has been abolished by the republic, and the head of a German noble house has the right to grant the son of his sister the right to use the coat of arms of his noble house, because the Federal Republic of Germany doesn't recognize the status of nobility.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,442
Reply with quote  #59 
OK, I won't compare you to impostors. You're an impostor. That's not comparing, that's accusing. Or actually more like stating. While I'm at it, you're a liar. And you know nothing, and are entirely incapable of learning more. You're constitutionally incapable of keeping your word. You never, ever shut up even though you never, ever, have anything worth saying. And, in case I haven't mentioned it before, you're a republican troll who came to this forum with the deliberate intention of disrupting it as much as possible and annoying everyone on it as much as you could. Which, your one and only talent being getting people's goat, is a lot. If you will not go away by yourself it is far, far past time that you were made to.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,442
Reply with quote  #60 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murtagon
Azadi, considering that you have said more than once that Rebecca Long-Bailey is ugly, then personal looks are important for a governmental candidate. OK, as strange as it may sound, are you attractive enough to catch the eye ... ? 

Green, warty, hideous, long tusks. Unlikely to appeal except possibly to another member of his species.

PS Great, now the troll has deleted his reply to make it look like I was gratuitously picking on him with this one. I am of course picking on him, but very far from gratuitously.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.