Jump to content

Talk:Australian knights and dames

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

British governors who stayed on in retirement, etc.

[edit]

I know of at least 2 British governors who remained in Australia after retiring from their vice-regal positions - Sir Edric Bastyan (Tasmania) and Sir Dallas Brooks (Victoria). Although their knighthoods were on the recommendation of the British government, would they qualify as "Australians" for the purposes of this list? Either that, or we redefine "Australian" to exclude them. There would probably be other British/Commonwealth knights (and possibly dames) who moved to Australia after getting their British/Commonwealth honours. For example, Garfield Sobers spent a lot of time here, played for South Australia, and even married an Australian (they divorced). If he were to decide to move here permanently, would that make him eligible to appear on this list even though Australia had nothing to do with his knighthood? Thoughts? -- JackofOz (talk) 01:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update. It seems Sobers already is an Australian citizen, with dual citizenship - see Talk:Garfield Sobers#Honorary Officer of the Order of Australia?. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would think that Australian Knights and Dames would include:

  • a person awarded with Imperial honours (at knight level) on the recommendation of any government while holding Australian citizenship ; and
  • a person awarded with Imperial honours (at knight level) directly by the sovereign while holding Australian citizenship (i.e. KG); and
  • an Australian awarded Imperial honours (at knight level) on the recommendation of an Australian government; and
  • anyone awarded with an Australian honour (at knight level) - i.e. AK.

or, a shorter alternative, anyone with a knighthood listed on http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/ -- Mattinbgn\talk 04:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've used It's an Honour as the main source of the list, on precisely the basis you refer to. I've added a few other names that have come to notice (It's an Honour does not include all awards made to Australians, since people can choose not to have their details shown there). My question is: do we include the Soberses and the Bastyans of the world? Sobers is an Australian citizen now, so he would seem to have a reasonable claim, even though he was already a knight when he became an Australian. Bastyan et al remained, I presume, British subjects and only British subjects, despite choosing to remain in Australia after their terms expired. Nobody would regard them as Australians on this basis alone - or would they? Maybe what we ought to do is confine it to Australians who became knights/dames, and exclude knight/dames who became Australians. Otherwise, anyone who satisfies "was an Australian at any point in their life" and "was a knight/dame at any point in their life" would qualify, and we might never get to the end. Maybe a separate section "Knights and dames with significant Australian associations" would do the trick - these people are of sufficient interest for their names not to be overlooked, but don't fully qualify as "Australian knights and dames" in the sense that that term would normally be understood. That would capture Sobers, Bastyan, Brooks and any similar cases, but would still exclude the bulk of the British governors/governors-general, who went straight back to the UK when their duties here were finished; and, in most cases, never returned to Australia. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Josephine Brazill/Joanna Brazill

[edit]

Please be advised that due to an apparent typographical error at http://www.womenaustralia.info/exhib/honours/dbe.html the name of the Australian dame in question has been mistranscribed. There is no Dame Josephine Brazill. Sister Mary Philippa (or Sister Philippa) Brazill was born as Joanna Brazill.

Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 10:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, It's an Honour also calls her "Josephine Brazill". -- JackofOz (talk) 20:43, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm Kenneth McIntosh

[edit]

Thanks to 122.105.52.110 for this edit, about Sir Malcolm McIntosh, who was awarded a KBE in 1996. Seems the Aussie authorities weren’t aware of his KBE, only of his Knight Bachelor. Nick Minchin's tribute on his death said his work was recognised by the "award of a British knighthood" (not 2 British knighthoods). See also the title page, which called him “McIntosh, Dr Malcolm Kenneth AC Kt”. Apparently he didn’t use “Sir” at any stage, which is a bit odd for a man who accepted 2 knighthoods. He acknowledged his Knight Bachelor in 1999, but that seems to be as far as he went. There are a few ghits for Malcolm McIntosh KBE, but they’re for a different person, also an Aussie, the South Australian Minister of Works in the 1960s. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:26, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm Kenneth McIntosh was not awarded the KBE. The gazette reference by 122.105.52.110 is to the Knight Bachelor award. Nick Minchin's tribute on his death was correct to say his work was recognised by the "award of a British knighthood". The title page, which called him “McIntosh, Dr Malcolm Kenneth AC Kt” would have been more correct to describe him as “McIntosh, Dr Malcolm Kenneth AC” since the Kt was awarded in 1996 and as a foreign award he would not have used the title ‘Sir’ or the post nominal ‘Kt’. Anthony Staunton (talk) 03:06, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Seems I was completely off-track about the KBE thing. I don't know where I got that idea from.
However, can you explain what you mean by "as a foreign award he would not have used the title ‘Sir’"? Are you referring to the 1992 cut-off point? If that's so, why does Sir David Higgins, an Australian who was knighted only in 2011, use the title 'Sir'? -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 07:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Probably because no one told the media. Titles and post nominals are part of Australia’s honours systems including the British honours system until 1992 and the Australian Honours System from 1975. Under the then British honours system and the present Australian Honours System permission can be sought to accept and wear foreign awards but such permission does not come with the right to use titles and post nominals. Keith Payne, the last Australian awarded the Victoria Cross was also awarded the US Distinguished Service Cross and sometimes his name is listed as Keith Payne VC OAM DSC (US). In this case he was awarded the Victoria Cross so who cares what other awards he received. Anthony Staunton (talk) 04:04, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Now, does this prohibition on the use of foreign titles extend to UK life peerages, and if not, why not? You’d be aware that the Australian Robert May, Baron May of Oxford was made a life peer in 2001. He was also made a knight bachelor, and we show him with the post nom “Kt”. There’s also Alec Broers, Baron Broers, an Australian who was knighted in 1998 and made a life peer in 2004. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 04:14, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have enough trouble keeping abreast of the Australian Honours System and orders, decorations and medals in general to have expertise on the peerage. If offered one, despite the fact I am a republican, I would humbly accept. Anthony Staunton (talk) 07:18, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rex Nan Kivell

[edit]

I've added Sir Rex Nan Kivell to "Non-Australian knights and dames with significant Australian associations". He was a New Zealander who went to the UK after WWI, and never returned home. He never visited Australia at all, but he was knighted by Australia for services to Australia. I'm wondering if this qualifies him to be considered an "Australian knight", or does he remain a "non-Australian who was knighted by Australia"? I know of no similar case. Anyone know any different? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 12:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Australian honoured by Australia does not make the person Australian. However, we do count as Australians 17 VC recipients born overseas, eight of who were awarded the medal posthumously. Six of the remaining nine spent the rest of their lives in Australia and died here. Of the other three, two had distinguished post war service in Australia and after their retirement returned to the lands of their birth. The 17th was Leonard Keysor who went back to England shortly after the end of the First World War and lived the rest of his life in England where he died. I am happy to call him an Australian since he served in the Australian forces. I would support amending the definition for the purposes of this list to have ‘non-Australian honoured by Australia’ or just having a note as to his status. He is listed in the Australian Dictionary of Biography at http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/nan-kivell-sir-rex-de-charembac-11219 and it would be remiss to leave him out. Anthony Staunton (talk) 05:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

The last paragraph could be rewritten and included as a note or source. All names of persons who were appointed to an order of chivalry in It's an Honour may be listed but I would only assume that the names of persons who were appointed to the Order of Australia would be complete. The reason not all awards appear in It's an Honour is not all awards in state lists are included. I would find it bizarre that someone created a knight or dame elected not to have their award displayed. It's an Honour is a great secondary source but a better secondary source for the military division of the Order of the British Empire with date and page of gazette is https://www.awm.gov.au/research/people/honours_and_awards/ Perhaps the best would be a statement that all awards appear in the London Gazette other than the Order of Australia that are gazetted in the Commonwealth Gazette which also republishes many but not all the British orders. Anthony Staunton (talk) 04:53, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly I need to modify my statement that all Order of Australia awards are gazetted in the Commonwealth Gazette to all awards of Knights and Dames of the Order of Australia awards were gazetted in the Commonwealth Gazette. Although no further awards of Knights and Dames of the Order of Australia will be awarded, Order of Australia awards ceased to be gazetted from the beginning of the 2012-2013 financial year. Anthony Staunton (talk) 15:09, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The following would be in this category:

Robert Lawrence Eichelberger, United States Army see https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/records/awm192/awm192-311-0156.pdf

George Churchill Kenney, United States Army see https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/records/awm192/awm192-303-0660.pdf Anthony Staunton (talk) 09:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. They're not listed at List of honorary British knights and dames but are categorised as Category:Honorary Knights Commander of the Order of the British Empire. Given that this was a British award, I wonder if they can properly be considered "Australian" knights. They may belong in the same category as Rex Nan Kivell above, except that he was a Commonwealth (New Zealand) citizen. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 10:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Although today it is more accurate and more helpful to describe it as the British honours system until 1983 when the Australia Government opted out and until 1992 when the Australian state governments opted out the Imperial honours system was as much an Australian system as a British system. You did not have to be an Australian to be nominated for an award and because Rex Nan Kivell was a Commonwealth (New Zealand) citizen his award was gazetted otherwise if he had been a non Commonwealth citizen he too could have received an honorary award. Anthony Staunton (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Should say "before 5 October 1992", not "after"

[edit]

It seems so based on [1], but I'm not totally sure, so not changing it myself.

"Before" would be consistent with the example that follows in the same paragraph.

Also, "before" would make sense such that pre-1992 Aussie Sirs and Dames wouldn't lose their titles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.250.38.174 (talk) 05:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that may be in reference to those orders of chivalry being awarded to Australian's after 1992. Papua New Guinea for example still recommends award's the Order of the British Empire, Knight Bachelor and the British Empire Medal to Australians as part of its honours lists. Nford24 (PE121 Personnel Request Form) 06:13, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Noel Power

[edit]

Sir Noel Power is deceased, as he died of a heart attack in Brunei a few years ago. He was knighted on the recommendation of the British Government, despite serving on the Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong at the time he was knighted. - (203.211.75.6 (talk) 01:52, 29 September 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Contradiction

[edit]

Why is Malcolm Mackintosh (sic) specifically excluded from entry into this list in the lead when he is listed along with other British-appointed Australian knights bachelor (eg Rod Eddington)? Hack (talk) 07:30, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The para in the lede can bear some close examination.
  • Appointments as knight or dame under the orders of foreign countries are not included, with the exception of British Imperial honours awarded to Australians by the UK and PNG Governments after 5 October 1992.
I agree with this.
  • Foreign knights or dames do not use the titles "Sir" or "Dame" or the use post nominals.
Now here we have a problem. Since this list is about Australian knights and dames, of what relevance are foreign knights or dames? Why did the author of that sentence, User:Anthony Staunton, think this was important to mention? Maybe he was confusing these people with Australians knighted by foreign countries, covered in the previous sentence.
  • For example the late Dr Malcolm Mackintosh who was appointed Companion of the Order of Australia in the Australia Day Honours List in 1999 and was created Knight Bachelor in the British New Year’s Honours List in 1995 is correctly known as Dr Malcolm Mackintosh AC without the title 'Sir'.
This is not an example of the preceding sentence, unless the author thought that McIntosh was not an Australian. In fact he was an Australian who spent some years in the UK and was knighted by the UK government in 1995. According to the first sentence, this means his award should be included. Again there seems to be confusion between whether or not he should be in the list (he is most certainly an "Australian knight"), and whether or not he should be called "Sir" (that's less clear). It's not a "both or neither" thing.
On the Sir issue, I can't think of any reason why he wouldn't qualify for Sir Malcolm, but I note he was referred to as "Dr McIntosh" in Nick Minchin's Senate eulogy (which noted his UK knighthood in passing and gave him the postnominals AC Kt, but not Sir).
Let us see what we can do to sort this mess out quickly. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 08:10, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Customarily, all Commonwealth knighthoods are respected in Australia. Maybe Dr McIntosh chose not to styled "Sir Malcolm" (which he was entitled to do) but this doesn't take away from the fact he was an Australian with a knighthood. Hack (talk) 08:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing I can think of is if the writer thought the knighthood was honorary. But this fails on 2 levels: (a) all citizens of Commonwealth realms get substantive knighthoods, and (b) Knight Bachelors are never awarded honorarily. They use KBEs or some other order of chivalry for honorary knighthoods. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 08:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so addressing the first bullet point. Australians can receive knighthoods from any Commonwealth realm that still recommends knighthoods, not just the UK and PNG. I have included in the list Bruce Saunders, an Australian expat who received a KBE from the Solomon Islands. There may be others. I would suggest the following as a replacement - Only substantive recipients of a knighthood from a Commonwealth realm are included. On the second bullet point, Recipients of honorary knighthoods/damehoods are not included. I don't really see why they should be listed if they aren't "real" knights/dames. For reasons spelt out previous comments, the third bullet point should be deleted as it makes no sense. Hack (talk) 10:38, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with everything, except I think Recipients of honorary knighthoods/damehoods are not included is redundant. It's a direct corollary of the first suggested sentence Only substantive recipients of a knighthood from a Commonwealth realm are included. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 11:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've worked out the significance of 1992. In 1992 the Australian Honours Order of Wearing was amended with the effect that "imperial" knighthoods/honours were considered foreign. This doesn't seem to have anything to with the substantive nature of these awards. Hack (talk) 01:07, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Australian knights and dames. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:27, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Australian knights and dames. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:41, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria section - British recognition

[edit]

The criteria section misinterprets source [3]. The source says that Britain doesn't recognise the conferral of Commonwealth honours on British citizens. A better source is required for the claim that Britain doesn't allow use of Sir/Madam for Commonwealth knighthoods and damehoods. Hack (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Australian_knights_and_dames&oldid=1199200192"