Thanks for the info. I do find it interesting. Julie ----- Original Message ----- From: "John M. Poythress" <brerfox@bellsouth.net> To: <POYTHRESS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 5:47 AM Subject: VA-Southside > There is a genealogy author who holds class from time to time on the VA > Southside wire and delivers some pretty interesting stuff. > Here is a sample. Thought others might be interested. > > Maynard > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: qvarizona > To: Paul Drake > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 8:23 AM > Subject: Re: "Gentlemen" > > > Paul. > > When did this practice fade away and the term "gentleman" begin to mean > only a polite man of good manners? > > Joanne > ***** > An answer to that specific and often asked question is, in the late 19th > and early 20th Century as Victorian manners of speaking gradually faded > away. Your ancestors would gag to hear the TV news folks call low-life > criminals "that gentleman" or "Mr.". > > Your use of the word "noble" in conjunction with gentleman is > noteworthy, since those words usually had very different meanings. The > former were born to nobility, and it could be gained no other way. That > said, the records/writings of the 17th and early 18th Century reveal > that those who had been knighted were SOMETIMES viewed as nobility, but > surely not always. As an example, occasionally, Sir Francis Drake (a > commoner knighted by Elizabeth I) was referred to as a nobleman, but not > consistently. > > One could become a gentleman or gentlelady by achieving affluence or > standing in the community, however they could not thereby become > "noble". Similarly, members of the nobility might be called gentlemen > (or gentlewomen), however those of nobility would be expected to have > viewed being so addressed as beneath their station, and such usage would > not have been appreciated. > > Finally, the term "Mr." was an indication of a person of the highest > standing, and just below the nobility. The term was almost NEVER applied > to other than men of very high position. The VA Burgesses usually were > addressed as "Mister", however when they were no longer in office, they > quite usually were not any longer so labeled. > > The term "Mrs." likewise revealed a lady of VERY high standing, however > it was exceedingly rare for a lady to be a "Mrs." unless her husband had > earned the title of "Mr.". In that regard, it is interesting that in > the Surry Tithables lists for a couple years in the 1670s Judith > (Burton?) Hunt Parker was listed as "Mrs. Parker", yet her husband, > sometimes "Dr.", usually pewterer Richard Parker was not referred to as > "Mr.". Why, I have not been able to learn. > > For your interest, Philip Bruce has a most interesting discussion of the > these matters of titles in his "Economic History of VA in the 17th > Century" > > > Genealogy without documentation is nothing. > Paul Drake JD > Genealogist & Author > <www.DrakesBooks.com> > > > ______________________________ > > > > > > ==== POYTHRESS Mailing List ==== > Poythress Genealogy Research Web > www.poythress.net >