Abstract
Through the twentieth century attempts were made to reform the honours system to recognise the growth of class and gender divisions. A new imperial order was introduced with ‘democratic’ aspirations, but its success was initially limited by corrupt sales of honours and by challenges to the parliamentary power of the aristocracy that was seen as tied to the distribution of honours. The various reform proposals are reviewed, but changes to the power of the House of Lords were limited until well into the late twentieth century and reforms in royal honours are still under discussion.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Popular deference in relation to the monarchy has long been demonstrated in social research, most notably in studies of royal coronations in the 1930s and 1950s (Mass-Observation 1937; Shils and Young 1953). Wider evidence on deference has been documented in the classic sociological studies of class, voting, and industrial action (e.g., Lockwood 1966; Stacey 1960; McKenzie and Silver 1968).
- 2.
James Bryce was a Liberal politician who served as British Ambassador to the United States from 1907 to 1913, when he was made Viscount Bryce. He was the first president of the Sociological Society in 1904, was president of the American Political Science Association in 1907, and was president of the British Academy from 1913 to 1917.
- 3.
Following the introduction of the new order, Ponsonby was promoted to GCVO in 1921 and GCB in 1926. On his retirement from Court service and from the honorific post of Lt Governor of Windsor Castle in 1935, he became Baron Sysonby. It was, perhaps, felt inappropriate and unnecessary to appoint him to the new order that he had done so much to create.
- 4.
Officially named ‘The Most Excellent Order of the British Empire’.
- 5.
The MBE in the military division was regarded as the equivalent of the Distinguished Service Cross and Military Cross, which had been awarded for active service in the First World War. The military OBE was seen as the equivalent of the DSO.
- 6.
Arthur John Maundy Gregory, son of an Anglican vicar, was an unsuccessful theatrical producer and magazine publisher who dealt in celebrity and Society gossip and developed a side-line in blackmail and acting as a Special Branch informant. A comprehensive account of Gregory and the honours scandal can be found in Cook (2008). Earlier accounts are those of Cullen (1974) and Macmillan (1954).
- 7.
Gregory fled to France after his release from prison and was supported by hush-money payments from his past clients and, perhaps, from the Conservative Party through funds channelled through right-wing organisations such as the Economic League. He lived in France as ‘Sir Arthur Gregory’ until arrested by the German occupying forces in 1940. He died in a prison camp in 1942.
- 8.
The Labour Bill to nationalise iron and steel was duly passed, though this was later reversed by the Conservative government elected in 1951.
- 9.
There are nominally three sub-lists. The Prime Minister’s list covers the civil division of the orders of the Bath and the British Empire, and the Knights Bachelor. The Diplomatic Service and Overseas list covers the order of St Michael and St George, and the Defence Service list covers the military divisions of the orders of the Bath and the British Empire.
- 10.
A full account of decolonisation and honours is given by Harper (2020: ch. 4).
- 11.
A number of Commonwealth countries began to introduce their own honours systems, often based on the British system. A non-titular four rank system was introduced in India in 1954, a three-rank Order of Canada (without knighthoods) was established in 1967, an Order of Australia was introduced and reformed over a ten-year period from 1975 (Fox 2002), and a five-rank New Zealand Order of Merit was introduced in 1996 and reformed in 2002.
- 12.
The award of baronetcies had ended in 1964, at the same time as the ending of hereditary peerages.
- 13.
Despite the general decline in deference there remains a widespread commitment to many aspects of traditional status. This is apparent, not least, in the regular publication of guides to titles and the ‘correct’ modes of address to use in correspondence and on formal occasions (see Bloomsbury 2007).
References
Armstrong, H. (2017). Honours: History and reviews. House of commons library briefing paper, no. 02832. London: Stationery Office.
Bloomsbury. 2007. Titles and Forms of Address. A Guide to Correct Use. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Brocklehurst, Alex 2008. Peerage Creations from 1958. London: House of Lords Library Note.
Cabinet Office. 2001. The house of Lords. Completing the reform. London: HMSO, Cmd 5291.
Cabinet Office 2005. Reform of the honours System. London: Stationery Office Cm 6479.
Cabinet Office 2007. The House of Lords: Reform. London: Stationery Office. Cm5291.
Cannadine, David 1998. Class In Britain. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Cole, G. D. H. 1955. Studies in Class Structure. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Cook, Andrew 2008. Cash for honours: The Story of Maundy Gregory. Stroud: History Press.
CSPL 1998. Fifth report: Funding of Political Parties. London: Stationery Office Cm 4057--1.
Cullen, Tom 1974. Maundy Gregory: Purveyor of honours. London: The Bodley Head.
Cunningham, Jack 2002. Joint Committee on House of Lords Reform. First report. London: HMSO.
de la Noy, Michael 1985. The honours System. London: Allen and Busby.
Fox, Karen 2002. Honouring a Nation. Canberra: ANU Press.
Galloway, Peter 1996. The Order of the British Empire. London: Central Chancery of the Orders of Knighthood.
Halsey, Albert H. 1978. Change in British Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hanham, Harold J. 1960. ‘The sale of honours in late Victorian England’. Victorian Studies 3, 3: 277-289.
Harper, Tobias 2020. From Servants of the Empire to Everyday Heroes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hitchner, Dell G. 1948. ‘The Labour government and the House of Lords’. Western Political Quarterly 1, 4: 426-438.
House of Lords 2017. Report of the Lord Speaker’s Committee on the Size of the House. London: Stationery Office.
Ingle, Ian 2010. ‘The Politics of Stardust or the Politics of Cool: Popular Music and the British honours System’. International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music 41, 1: 51-71.
Kelly, Richard 2020. Peerage Creations Since 1997. London: House of Commons Briefing Paper.
Kelso, Alexander 2009. Parliamentary Reform at Westminster. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Labour Party. 2022. A New Britain. Renewing Our Democracy and Rebuilding Our Economy. Report of the Commission on the UK’s Future. Newcastle: The Labour Party.
Lockwood, David 1966. ‘Sources of variation in working-class images of society’. Sociological Review 14, 3: 249-267.
Macmillan, Gerald 1954. Honours For sale. London: Richards Press.
Marwick, Arthur 1977. War and Social Change in the Twentieth Century. London: Macmillan.
Mass-Observation. 1937. May the Twelfth: Mass Observation Day Surveys. London: Faber & Faber, 1987.
McKenzie, Robert T. and Silver, Alan 1968. Angels in Marble. London, Heinemann.
Miliband, Ralph 1978. ‘A state of de-subordination’. British Journal of Sociology 29, 4: 399-409.
OPM 1948. Parliamentary bill 1947. Agreed Statement. London: HMSO. Cmd 7380.
PASC. 2001. The Second Chamber: Completing the Reform. 5th report. London: Stationery Office.
PASC. 2004. A Matter of Honour: Reforming the honours System, 5th report. Vol. 1 and 2. London: Stationery Office, Cm 212-1.
PASC 2012–2013. The honours System. Second Report of Session 2012-13. London: Stationery Office.
Phillips Report. 2004. Review of the honours System. London: Stationery Office for the Cabinet Office.
Shils, Edward A. and Young, Michael 1953. ‘The meaning of the Coronation’. British Journal of Sociology 1, 2: 63-81.
Stacey, Margaret 1960. Tradition and Change: A Study of Banbury. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thompson, F. Michael L. 1963. English Landed Society in the Nineteenth Century. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Vickers, Hugo 1994. Royal orders. London: Boxtree.
Wakeham Report. 2000. A house for the future. Royal commission on the reform of the house of lords. London: Stationery Office, Cmd 4534.
Walker, John 1986. The Queen Has Been Pleased. The British honours System at Work. London: Secker and Warburg.
Wilson Report 2001. Honours: Criteria for Levels of honours. London: Stationery Office, Cm 4057-I.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Scott, J. (2024). Contested Honours. In: Class and Social Honour. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45948-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45948-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-45947-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-45948-1
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)