* Title vs Name Prefix

[BobWard]

I am getting some unexpected results when I assign a name prefix and a title to a person. For some reason the name prefix is also showing up as a "Title" in the name block data on my ISR printouts.

I have attached a screenshot as an example. This particular person was a Knight, so I assigned a name prefix as "Sir". I also created a "Title" as "Knight".

In the name block, the name prefix of "Sir" is also being listed as a "Title".

Can anyone explain why the name prefix is also being listed as a title in the name block area?

[TimTreeby]

Presumably you have customised your ISR as Title does not show in name block by Default. This would mean that you are actually showing the wrong expression for Title. Which should be %INDI.TITL[1]%

[mjashby]

Bob,

I believe you have created a specific Attribute with a given date which is included with any other recorded facts for the person.

To be pedantic, there is no such title as 'Knight', that is a description of a person's status and/or of something that has happened to them - the Attribute you've recorded. When someone is Knighted, they become entitled 'Sir', which, I believe is why that appears correctly in the top section of the narrative FH report from your input, but they may also have been awarded a formal 'Title' which should properly be recorded as a Suffix, such as Duke/Baron of etc., but that is not always the case, i.e. not all Knighthood's carry a Title.

If you want to include a person's Title with their name, then you could use an 'alternative name', unless the Title was acquired from Birth, in the form [Prefix i.e. Title]:] His Royal Highness The Prince [Name:] Philip Mountbatten [Suffix, i.e. Formal Title:] Duke of Edinburgh, etc.

Mervyn

[tatewise]

Yes, in summary, his Title should be Sir Gilbert de Clare or just Sir.
There should be no Name Prefix.
Delete the Title item from Report Options > Main Section Items or change its Expression to %INDI.TITL[1]% (instead of %INDI.NAME[1].NPFX%).

[BobWard]

Let me sort through your comments a little slowly.

First of all, I find that the option to assign a "Title" appears in 2 locations.
1. It is an Attribute in the Standard Fact Set/Types. However, I did not click on this Attribute in order to add it to a person's profile.

2. "Title" also appears in the Property Box as an option attached to the Name box, i.e., Alternate Names and Titles > Add> Name, Title. This is the option that I used to add the title. When I add the Title using this procedure, the Title now also appears as an entry under the Facts Tab and gets listed in the ISR as shown in the above image.

Educate me a little here on English protocol for titles given to nobility. Even though I have English roots, I have never lived there, so forgive my ignorance on this issue. When a person is "knighted", is his title referred to as "Sir" or "Knight" I was thinking it should be "Knight" (even though I originally had it as "Sir"), under the rationale that a king or queen holds the title of "King" or "Queen". So why would not a knight have the title of "Knight"?

[tatewise]

1. and 2. are just two different ways of adding a standard Title Attribute.
In fact when you use method 2. it says:

Titles can be added or updated here or on the Facts tab of the Property Box.
If you wish to add additional details for a title - such as dates or notes - this can be done on the Facts tab.

Compare that with being able to add Birth/Death Events, etc, either via the Main tab or the Facts tab or the All tab, but each one allows more and more details to be added. Like most software there is often more than one way to achieve the same task.

The Title: shown under Children: in the ISR is your customisation of the Report Options > Contents.
Maybe you have forgotten, but you have significantly customised those Main Section Items.
The default Installation Settings do NOT show Spouse:, or Children:, or Title:.
So you have changed the Hide/Show item option via the Edit button for Spouses and Children, and used Add to create the Title item, but set its Expression to %INDI.NAME[1].NPFX% by mistake instead of %INDI.TITL[1]%.

British nobility protocols are complicated, and mere mortals rarely understand them.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_nobility.
However, your King/Queen analogy is mistaken.
Firstly, a King/Queen inherits their title automatically when their parental monarch dies. It is not bestowed upon them like a knighthood. When the monarch dies we say: "The King is dead. Long live the King."
To follow your analogy through ~ If a Knight were knighted, then a King would be kinged, and a Queen would be queened, but they are not.
When bestowed with a knighthood, or knighted, then the man's Title becomes Sir (women cannot be knighted).

[AdrianBruce]

... Even though I have English roots, I have never lived there, so forgive my ignorance on this issue. When a person is "knighted", is his title referred to as "Sir" or "Knight" ...

Your ignorance is forgiven, especially as most of use who live on this side of the Atlantic get baffled as well! At risk of getting things wrong, or being accused of over-simplifying, I think there are 2 (possibly more) concepts to understand: Style and Title. So far as I can see, having tried desperately to remind myself, Style is basically that thing which is used as part of the person's name or as a means to address them. And I wouldn't be surprised if there are several styles depending on how one wants to refer to them. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forms_of_ ... ed_Kingdom. Thus, a Knight would be styled "Sir". And I'd put this into the Prefix to a Name. If he was a Knight of some particular Order, then the initials of that rank and order would appear in the Suffix to the name. E.g. "KCB" is the suffix for a Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath.

The Title is basically what you have inherited or been raised to. For instance,

In the case of the Duke of Edinburgh, his titles are Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, but he bears the style and precedence of a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. As part of the princely status is the right to the style of "His/Her Royal Highness", so the Duke is known as "HRH The Duke of Edinburgh" or else "Philip, Duke of Edinburgh".

(Patrick Cracroft-Brennan, 29 December 2009, family-historian-users@rootsweb.com - but my emphasis).

My belief is that Knights have no Title in this formal sense because they do not inherit their knighthood.

Just to confuse matters even more, there is something called a Baronetcy. These look at first sight like a knighthood as the normal style is "Sir John Smith, Bt (or Bart)" - but that "Bt" or "Bart" is the giveaway. These are heritable and do appear to have titles - the list on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_b ... Kingdom:_Y shows some sample titles.

In the end, unless we work for Messrs Burke or Debrett, a little terminological inexactitude isn't that important!

[BobWard]

The Title: shown under Children: in the ISR is your customisation of the Report Options > Contents.
Maybe you have forgotten, but you have significantly customised those Main Section Items.
The default Installation Settings do NOT show Spouse:, or Children:, or Title:.
So you have changed the Hide/Show item option via the Edit button for Spouses and Children, and used Add to create the Title item, but set its Expression to %INDI.NAME[1].NPFX% by mistake instead of %INDI.TITL[1]%.

You are correct, Mike. I did have "Title" added to the "Show Item" in the "Label" box under "Contents". So, I just deleted "Title" from that box and now all is well in the way that I expected the ISR to format my data.

Adrian, thank you for your comment: "Thus, a Knight would be styled "Sir". And I'd put this into the Prefix to a Name." - That is also the way that I tend to see this issue.

So, along with your & Mike's suggestions (and Tim Treeby), I am now happy with my customized ISR output. Thanks for your help.