Peerage Titles without "of"

[S. S.]

As many are aware, there exist quite a few peerages without the word "of" in the title. While editing the entry under Earl Bellmore [I], I stopped to account for these titles with the following footnote: 

Several peerage titles, specifically Earldoms and even Marquessates, omit the word “of” as part of the title, e.g. among Earldoms: Alexander of Hillsborough (1963); Alexander of Tunis (1952); Amherst (1826); Annesley [I] (1789); Attlee (1955); Baldwin of Bewdley (1937); Bathurst (1772); Beatty (1919); Beauchamp (1815); Beaulieu (1784); Belmore [I] (1797); Brassey (1911); Brooke (1746); Brownlow (1815); Bruce (1821); Buxton (1920); Cadogan (1718); Cadogan (1800); Cairns (1878); Camden (1786); Canning (1859); Castle Stewart [I] (1800); Castleton (1720); Cathcart (1814); Cave of Richmond (1928); Cawdor (1827); Clinton (1746); Compton (1812); Coningsby (1719); Conyngham [I] (1781); Conyngham [I] (1797); Cornwallis (1753); Cowley (1857); Cowper (1718); Curzon of Kedleston (1911); de Grey (1816); De La Warr (1761); de Montalt (1886); Digby (1790); Egerton (1897); Erne [I] (1789); Farquhar (1922); Fauconberg (1756); Fife [I] (1759); FitzHardinge (1841); FitzWalter (1730); FitzWilliam (1716, 1746); Gower (1746); Grandison [I] (1721); Grandison [I] (1767); Granville (1715); Granville (1833); Grey (1806); Grosvenor (1784); Haig (1919); Howe (1788); Howe (1821); Innes (1837); Jellicoe (1925); Jermyn (1826); Jowitt (1951); Ker (1722); Kitchener (1914); Landaff [I] (1797); Ligonier (1766); Ligonier [I] (1776); Lloyd-George of Dwyfor (1945); Loreburn (1911); Ludlow [I] (1760); Macartney [I] (1794); Manvers (1806); Mount Cashell [I] (1781); Mountbatten of Burma (1947); Nelson (1804); Nugent [I] (1776); O’Neill [I] (1800); Panmure [I] (1743); Peel (1929); Percy (1766); Rivers (1466, 1626, 1641); Roberts (1901); Russell (1861); Somers (1821); Sondes (1880); St Aldwyn (1915); St Maur (1863); St Vincent (1797); Stanhope (1718); Strange (1786); Sydney (1874); Talbot (1761); Talbot (1784); Temple (1749); Temple of Stowe (1822); Vane (1823); Verney [I] (1743); Wandesford [I] (1758); Wavell (1947); Whitworth (1815); Winterton [I] (1766). And among Marquessates: Camden (1812); Conyngham [I] (1816); Cornwallis (1792); Curzon of Kedleston (1921); Duoro (1814); Grey (1740); Townshend (1787); Wellesley [I] (1799). This usually occurs for a few reasons, i.e. (1) the peerage title is the family name, e.g. Amherst, Annesley, Cadogan, Cowley, Cowper etc; (2) in some cases it is omitted when the title was the surname (not of the party ennobled but only) of a family from whom the grantee derived descent, e.g. Beauchamp, Brooke, Brownlow, Ferrers, Innes, Manvers, Sondes etc; (3) Irish peerages sometimes leave out the locale connected with the title and are thus the anomalous cases of the other two, e.g. Belmore, Castle Stewart, Erne, Fife, Mount Cashell, Winterton etc. [S.S.]

I hope I did not miss any :)

S.S.

[Peter FitzGerald]

Sometimes the "of" seems to have been omitted in Irish titles because the title refers to a place not in Ireland (e.g. Fife, Landaff, Panmure, Winterton). This is not universal, though - often in such cases the "of" is included (e.g. Darnley, Mexborough, Ranfurly).

Other times it seems to have been omitted because the title refers to a geographical feature rather than to a settlement (e.g. Erne (a lough), Belmore (a mountain), Loreburn (a stream)) - perhaps these are not considered places one can be an earl "of".

[S. S.]

I did not think of the case of some [I] peerages referring to a geographical feature rather than a proper settlement, hence the disuse of "of". It also now makes more sense in my head as to why Earl Fife does not have "of" in the title. 

S.S.

[dpth...@gmail.com]

Not much different here from what SS already said, but for what it's worth, here is what Cokayne said in The Complete Peerage:

 

"When the family name is taken as the Peerage title it is more usual in the case of Earldoms, or even of Marquessates, to omit the word " of "; e.g. (among Marquesses) Conyngham, Comwallis, Townshend, &c; also (among Earls) Amherst, Annesley, Bathurst, Cadogan, Cairns, Cathcart, Cowley, Graham, Grey, Fitzwilliam, Howe, Nelson, Poulett, Russell, Spencer, Stanhope, Waldegrave, &c. In some cases "of" is omitted when the title was the surname (not of the party ennobled, but only) of a family from whom the grantee derived descent, e.g. (among Earls) Beauchamp, Brooke, Brownlow, Ferrers, Granville, Innes, Manvers, Sondes, Strange, Sydney, Vane, &c. Contrariwise, the word "of" is sometimes retained (more especially when the surname is of local origin), e.g., Earl of Berkeley, Earl of Coventry, Earl of Craven, &c. The Marquess Camden, Earl Cawdor, &c„ seem, as English titles, somewhat anomalous, tho', in the Irish peerage, names of places are not unfrequently so treated, e.g., Earl Belmore, Earl Castle Stewart, Earl Erne, Earl Fife, Earl Mountcashell, Earl Winterton, &c.”

[bx...@yahoo.com]

Spencer (1765)

Brooke

[Observer]

Here is a little background serving to explain the apparent Marquess Camden anomaly. The marquessate and the older Camden barony are held by the Pratt family and the 'Camden' comes from the house they owned, Camden Place, Chislehurst, which had been named after the historian William Camden, who had lived in a former house on the site. The family owned the area of north London that came to be called Camden Town. So, the Camden peerage name is a sort of borrowed surname or a house name, depending on how you look at it.

[Richard R]

One of my great peerage writer heros, Valentine Heywood, had a word or two to say on this subject, including a list of for then (1953) current marquessates and earldoms omitting 'of' in their titles. See attached.

[Jonathan]

For completeness, and to be slightly pedantic, you are referring to perages of the rank or Earl and above. The vast majority of viscountcies and probably all baronies omit the word "of", even when taken from placenames. For these ranks, it's interesting to consider the exceptions that include "of." A small number of Scottish viscountcies do; Arbuthnott and Oxfuird come to mind. Are these any others?

[S. S.]

You are quite right Jonathan that Viscountcies and Baronies omit the word "of". However, this is not universal throughout the peerage. I will illustrate in a few examples the phenomenon of the use of "of" in viscountcies and baronies. 

The first and probably most interesting instance of this is a fad in the 18th century, whereby several baronies were written in the strange construction as follows (courtesy of the venerable Valentine Heywood):

"Lord XX, Baron of XX in the County of XX". Valentine Heywood points this out as follows: "Interesting illustrations of the difference between the title of a peer and his territorial designations are to be found in a number of peerages. Thus when Sir Edward Brabazon, ancestor of the Earls of Meath, was raised to the peerage, his patent described him as Lord Brabazon, Baron of Ardee; and when Thomas Graves, a distinguished naval officer who fought under Lord Howe in the Battle of the First of June, was ennobled, it was as Lord Graves, Baron of Gravesend in the County of Londonderry". 

Another example is the Barony of Avonmore [I] conferred upon Barry Yelverton in 1795, which is given as "Lord Yelverton, Baron of Avonmore in the County of Cork", i.e. "Baron Yelverton, of Avonmore in the County of Cork" (thus we would call him "Lord Yelverton" or "Baron Yelverton", which form is also found on the patent roll). One more is the Barony of Aylmer [I] conferred upon Matthew Aylmer in 1718, which is given as "Lord Aylmer, Baron of Balrath in the County of Meath", i.e. "Baron Aylmer, of Balrath in the County of Meath". This form probably harks back the days of the feudal baronage where a person would quite literally be "Baron of XYZ". 

Certain ancient [I] baronies also include "of" in the title by long-standing usage, e.g. Baron of Dunsany [I]; Baron of Offaly [I]; Baron of Ballyane [I] etc. Other Irish baronies sometimes are merely styled with "of", but due to the absence of proper enrollment or evidence of these earlier peerages, we will never know for sure if the word "of" was included as part of the title or not.

From what I have observed, many [S] Viscountcies do in fact have "of" as part of the title. The present [S] viscounts, who do not possess a higher title, viz. Viscounts Falkland, Viscounts of Arbuthnott and Viscounts of Oxfuird. Only the first, Falkland, omits "of" as part of the title by custom. Even then, most writers omit the word "of" in [S] viscountcies to bring them in line with the practice with the other viscountcies of the other peerages [E], [GB] [UK] etc. 

This inclusion of the word "of" in most Scottish viscountcies can also be backed up by looking at the chronological index of Scottish peerages given as the appendix to The Peerage of Scotland (1813) by John Philip Wood (which work was used by Sir James Balfour Paul in his eminent The Scots Peerage and is, as far as I can ascertain, the sole chronological listing of Scottish peerages given in a tolerably accurate manner): 

"10th November 1620. Sir Henry Cary... [granted the titles of] Viscount of Falkland, and Lord Cary"

"28th June 1622. Sir John Murray of Cockpool, knight... Viscount of Annand".

Some [S] viscountcies are given without "of" as well, so good to bear that in mind. 

S.S.

[Peter de Loriol Chandieu]

I can think of at least two peerage titles that contain 'of';

My great uncle, Sydney Webb, created Baron Webb of Passfield Corner

another great uncle, Leonard Courtney, was created Baron Courtney of Penwith

some cousins are Barons Clifford of Chudleigh.

My great grandfather's cousin, Alexander Duff, was created Duke of Fife.

I am sure most of the peerages within the ambit of my british family contain of in the title.

Peter

[S. S.]

Peter, I was more interested in seeing which peerages omit "of" from the title and those that explicitly include it as part of their nomenclature from the original LP. It is true there are plenty of peerages that include "of" when differentiating from similar sounding titles as you gave the examples of Baron Clifford of Chudleigh etc as above. 

S.S.

S.S.