Richard Pennycuick ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>I recently needed some information on Sir Arthur Somervell (1863-1937),
>not, I assume, a name known to many of us and his music even less so;
>certainly I've never encountered any.  Presumably he became Sir Arthur as
>a result of his standing as a composer.  ...  But surely Vaughan Williams
>and Holst would be on most people's list of great British composers, but
>neither got to be knighted.  I imagine VW would not have been keen to keep
>saying, "It's pronounced RAFE!", but I remain intrigued.  Is there a story
>here?

I think at least part of the problem is that not only knights are addressed
as Sir, but also baronets and there are hereditary baronetcies around.

So, although few people realise this, Sir Thomas Beecham becamse Sir Thomas
when his father died - he inherited the baronetcy.  (He was also later
knighted for his services to music but that's neither here nor there)

Somervell, according to Grove, was knighted the year after his retirement
as inspector of music to the Board of Education.  So his knighthood was
probably for services of musical education.

BTW Vaughan Williams waz offered a knighthood but turned it down.  Holst
probably died too soon (he was only 60).

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]