Jump to content

Talk:Order of Leopold II

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 145.226.30.44 (talk) at 17:02, 11 February 2014 (different definitions of knight). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

RVO comparison

"The British Royal Victorian Order, which is a personal gift of the British monarch and has similar classes, but with the difference that the Order of Leopold II does not confer knighthood at the higher classes."
I was reverted on my attempt to edit this phrase so I will explain here: this awkward turn of phrase is perfectly backwards. As it reads, one would think that the lowest rank of the order of Leopold II confers knighthood whereas the higher ones do not, which is patently absurd (an officer of an order of knighthood is still a knight!). What it is attempting to say, no doubt, is that this order is unlike the RVO or OBE, which are knighthoods only in their highest rank, whereas most continental orders, including Belgium's, place knighthood at the entry-level rank (chevallier).

At the very least, the phrase should be "does not only confer knighthood at the higher classes", but this is still less awkward than reformulating the assertion positively ("confers knighthood from the lowest class"), since this phrasing does not assume that the reader is already familiar with the RVO's ranks. --145.226.30.44 (talk) 14:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the wording is that the Order of Leopold II doesn't confer knighthood. "Knight" in the 3 Belgian orders is a rank within the order but - unlike the higher classes of various British orders (which is why I reverted) - gives/is no/not a noble title. According to the Belgian Constitution only the King can confer noble titles by bestowing them, the order isn't set up to do this. It's merely a "medal" for service but not a "title" -- fdewaele, 11 February 2014, 17:25.
We're clearly working with different definitions of knight, but I don't understand yours. For me, a knight is someone who is given an award of knighthood by a sovereign country (or, more dubiously, by a formerly sovereign dynasty). It is not a noble title (like baron or count). So a French chevalier des palmes académiques is, by definition, a knight. (As are, a fortiori, the officers of that order.)
Aha--while writing this, seeing that your profile looks Flemish, I remembered that in Dutch you have a title Jonkheer, which we don't have in French, and wondering if that had something to do with it found the article Ridder (title). This explains your viewpoint. I certainly agree that the Order of Leopold II does not give one the status of Ridder! I would submit, though, that it is dangerous to translate Ridder as "knight", because in England, France, and Italy, there is no equivalent rank (except maybe the Knight of Kerry), and in these countries and languages knight/cavaliere/chevalier means anyone who receives an award (of merit 99% of the time) with that name, which does not confer a noble title. (Which is no doubt why Wikipedia calls its article "Ridder" instead of translating it.) --145.226.30.44 (talk) 17:02, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]