Esquire (abbreviated Esq.)[1] is a term of West European origin. In Britain and Ireland, it is a title of respect awarded to men of higher social rank[2] The word comes from Squire, which is an apprentice to a royal knight. The title "Esquire" has been used continuously since it was created in the distant past in Europe and many uses continue un-interrupted today. In the United States, Esq. distinguishes licensed practitioners of law.
Contents |
Chief Justice Coke (1552-1634) defined "gentlemen" as those who bear coat armour, and are therefore superior to esquires. He followed Sir William Camden (1551-1623, Clarenceux King of Arms), who defined esquires as:
Nineteenth century tables of precedences further distinguished between esquires by birth and esquires by office (and likewise for gentlemen). Today, however, the term gentleman is rarely found in official tables of precedence and when it is invariably simply means a man. One extinct English usage of the term was to distinguish between men of the upper and lower gentry, who were "esquires" and "gentlemen" respectively (between, for example, "Thomas Smith, Esq." and "William Jones, Gent."). Examples of this may be found in the Parish Tithe Map Schedules made under the Tithe Commutation Act 1836.[4] Later examples appear in the list of subscribers to The History of Elton, by the Rev. Rose Fuller Whistler, published in 1892, which distinguishes between subscribers designated Mr (another way of indicating gentlemen) and those allowed Esquire.
According to one typical definition,[5] esquires in English law included:
A slightly later source[6] defines the term as
Esquire — A rank next below that of Knight. Besides those Esquires who are personal attendants of Knights of Orders of Knighthood, this title is held by all attendants on the person of the Sovereign, and all persons holding the Sovereign's commission being of military rank not below Captain; also, by general concession, by Barristers at Law, Masters of Arts and Bachelors of Law and Physic.
However, formal definitions such as these were proposed because there was, in reality, no fixed criterion distinguishing those designated Esquire: it was essentially a matter of impression as to whether a person qualified for this status. William Segar, Garter King of Arms (the senior officer of arms at the College of Arms), wrote in 1602: "And who so can make proofe, that his Ancestors or himselfe, have had Armes, or can procure them by purchase, may be called Armiger or Esquier." Honor military, and civill (1602; lib. 4, cap. 15, p. 228). (By Armes he referred to a coat of arms; it is not clear from this quotation whether Segar made a distinction between esquires and gentlemen.)
Although Esquire is the English translation of the French écuyer, the latter indicated legal membership in the nobilities of ancien régime France and contemporaneous Belgium, whereas an esquire belongs to the British gentry rather than to its nobility. Écuyer in French (11th to 14th century) means "Shield-bearer", a knight in training, age 14 to 21. In the later stages of the Middle Ages, the cost of the adoubement or accolade became too important for many noblemen to bear. They stayed écuyers all their life long, making these title synonimous with nobleman or gentleman.
The most common occurrence of term Esquire today is the conferral as the suffix "Esq." in order to pay an informal compliment to a male recipient by way of implying gentle birth. Today, there remain respected protocols, especially in the United States, for identifying those to whom it is thought most proper that the suffix should be given, especially in very formal or in official circumstances. The social rank of Esquire is that above gentleman.
The breadth of Esquire (as Esq.) had become universal in the United Kingdom by the late 20th century, for example being applied by some banks to all men who did not have a grander title. Although the College of Arms continues to restrict use of the word Esquire in official grants of arms to a limited set (smaller even than that outlined by the list above), it uses the term Esquire without restriction in addressing correspondence. Many people in the United Kingdom no longer perceive any distinction between "Mr" and "Esquire" at all so that, in everyday usage, a distinction is very rarely intended.
To be used with the name in initial format (e.g., K.S. Smith, Esq.) it is still used by many offices of the Chairman in business and also many traditional carriage trade businesses such as Christie's and Berry Bros. & Rudd. This rather old-fashioned usage is generally employed to imply that the addressee would be of the gentry by the mere fact of the sender's interaction when addressing those without another, higher, rank or title. British men invited to Buckingham Palace receive their invitations in an envelope with the suffix Esq. after their names while men of foreign nationalities instead have the prefix Mr (women are addressed as Miss, Ms, or Mrs).[7] The same practice applies for other post from the palace (e.g., to employees etc.).
In the United States, the suffix Esq. is most commonly encountered among lawyers.[8] This usage applies to both male and female lawyers.[9] Some states also address its ministerial officers (such as justices of the peace, commissioners of deeds, and notaries public) using "Esquire" as a suffix.
A person who engages in the unauthorized practice of law and uses the term "esquire" in a manner "which is reasonably likely to induce others to believe that the person or entity is authorized to engage in the practice of law"[10] may be in trouble. All United States court cases questioning the use of the term "Esquire" involve someone who was actually engaged in unauthorized law practice. The concern is that using "Esquire" in certain circumstances might create the impression that someone is claiming to have an active law license.[11] In some jurisdictions, it is also customary to refer to attorneys who are members of that jurisdiction's bar with the title Hon. because lawyers are officers of the court.
When using the title, John Smith, Esq. or Mr. John Smith would be correct, but Mr. John Smith, Esq. would be incorrect.[12]
Similarly, when addressing social correspondence to a commissioned officer of the United States Foreign Service, Esquire may be used as a complimentary title. While the abbreviated Esq. is correct, Esquire is typically written in full when addressing a diplomat.[13][14] If any other titles are used on the same line, Esquire is omitted.
Some fraternal groups use the title of Esquire. The Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks uses the title of Esquire for an appointed office position. Similar to the old position of assistant to a knight, the BPOE Esquire serves as the chief assistant to the Lodge's Exalted Ruler, and is in charge of the ballot box, instructing and initiating new members, and examining visiting Elks members.[15] One appendant body in Freemasonry also uses Esquire as a degree title.[16]
When addressing a person who has an academic degree or other post-nominal professional designation, such as a Certified Public Accountant, a writer should use either the post-nominal designation OR the Esq. As Esquire is a courtesy title, it should not be used with post-nominals.[17]
Before 1947, the term Esquire was used by most senior government officers, especially the former members of the Indian Civil Service and the rest of the higher services of the Imperial Civil Services. The term was used by members of the anglicised segments of the Indian society who could join the government services. It was mostly used by government officials who could claim to have received their legal education in England, especially in either Oxford or Cambridge University, and had become Barristers in London.
<ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Tussle_Over_Titles; see Help:Cite errors/Cite error references no text
|
||||||||