Differences in Kingdoms?
Shawn Legere Dunham
Worlde over. Has anyone ever done a poll on it?
ie. I'm curious which Kingdoms say Huzzah and which ones say
Vivat. I'm interested in finding out the general
personalities of the different kingdoms.
Brighid
Monaleek
>Vivat.
Lets see. In Meridies it's Hip Hip Hooray and the Middle says Hoobah.
I remember one time in Ansteorra making a compromise of Vivat and Hoorah it
was Hevit But it never really caught on.
Genevieve McCullum
David Koski
At the court for our principality of NorthShield they say Huzzah..
Whereas in our barony of NordSkogen we say Vivat.
So I think there is no set cheer..
David de le Feu
Crew-member of the black ship InverNess
Cumhail
Vivat Trimaris!!
your sevant,
Cumhail
Berwyn
> Vivat. I'm interested in finding out the general
> personalities of the different kingdoms.
Could be an interesting project. Here are the ones I know about.
East: Vivat
Middle Hoobah
Northshield (Mid principality) "Vivat",(sing) "Vivant" (pl) for awards,
"Skoal" for toasts
Ealdormere: Wassail
I saw a court once(Artemesia??) several years ago where it was Hip Hip
Hooray.
Award structure and sumptuary laws vary consideably among the kingdoms.
For example, many kingdoms have a level of awards that automatically
carry a Grant of Arms. In the Middle, the GoA is a separate award, and
until very recently was only given to past Kingdom officers.
(fortunately it now has been broadened.) On the other hand, in the
Middle, anyone with an AoA can wear a metal circlet on his or her head,
something reserved for higher ranks some other places.
The personality issue might be a bit trickier to nail down, as people
within a kingdom may have a different view of its personality than would
someone from outside. (Go to Pennsic sometime and ask a Midrealmer
about the East, then ask an Easterner about the Middle.) Heck, there
was recently a discussion on the Northshield list about how Northshield
is different from the rest of the Midrealm.
Berwyn
--
Lord Berwyn AEthelbryght of Ackley
Rudivale, Northshield, Midrealm
Bert Garwood, Grand Forks, ND
ForlornH
>Middle Hoobah
>Northshield (Mid principality) "Vivat",(sing) "Vivant" (pl) for awards,
>"Skoal" for toasts
>Ealdormere: Wassail
>I saw a court once(Artemesia??) several years ago where it was Hip Hip
>Hooray.
Æthelmearc also uses Vivat as a holdover from its days as part of the East.
During the reign of Ariel and Angharad they tried to get "urra" going as the
cheer but it never caught on...
Rich Goranson (Lord Stephan Calvert deGrey)
Buffalo, NY (Barony of the Rhydderich Hael, Æthelmearc)
Diplomacy addict, FFRF member, Expos fan and medieval re-creationist
"I could have conquered Europe, all of it, but I had women in my life." - Henry
II
DeSevyngy
In article <36365826...@imagin.net>, Shawn Legere Dunham
<sdu...@imagin.net> writes:
>I'm curious which Kingdoms say Huzzah and which ones say
>Vivat.
Vivat Artemisia!
Huzzah Caid! (well, its been a few years, but I think they still huzzah) ;)
HL Isabeau de Sevyngy
Lady Isabeau de Sevyngy
Squired to Sir Sakura kita no Maikeru
Barony of Loch Salann
Artemisia
Lucy700095
And, Huzzah! OUTLANDS!!!!!
Robyn Von Glonn
Barony of Caerthe
Shire of Caer Galen
Dorothy J Heydt
In the West people say either Huzzah or Hurrah (depends on how
long you have been in, I think). Prefaced, of course, by
Hip, hip.
*DIGRESSION MODE ON*
It used to be in Kingdom Law: ~"The Herald shall say, 'Hip,
hip!' and the people shall say, 'Hurrah!' and this shall be
repeated thrice, after which there shall be silence."~
That was necessary because several of us had recently perpetrated
a fannish filk operetta called "H.M.S. Trek-a-Star" which
contained the lines,
"Give three point one four one six cheers
For the Science Officer with pointed ears!"
"Hip, hip!" "Hurrah!"
"Hip, hip!" "Hurrah!"
"Hip, hip!" "Hurrah! Hip!"
"Hip? HIM? You've got to be kidding."
"That was the residual point one four one six of a cheer."
"Though I appreciate your sentiments, I find their expression irrational."
And enough of the perpetrators were also playing in the West
Kingdom that the populace had to be restrained from giving pi
cheers in Court.
*DIGRESSION MODE OFF*
Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin Dorothy J. Heydt
(aka Yeoman Rand, the Josephine role)
Mists/Mists/West Albany, California
PRO DEO ET REGE djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
_A Point of Honor_ is out....
Sk8Maven
The herald cries "Vivat--"
and the populace responds with "TRIMARIS!'
Repeat 3 times.
Maven
William Underhill
>
> >Kingdoms say Huzzah and which ones say
>
> >Vivat.
>
>
> I remember one time in Ansteorra making a compromise of Vivat and Hoorah it
> was Hevit But it never really caught on.
An Tir uses 'Huzzah!'; I suspect this is inherited from the West, since
An Tir used to be a Principality of the Kingdom of the West (until An
Tir threw off the yoke of its oppressors :-)
Yours aye,
Uilleam mac Alan vic Hamish, called the Mariner
--
.---------------------------------------------------------------------.
| William Underhill tr...@geocities.com |
| Speaker-to-Electrons http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6650 |
| Uilleam mac Alan vic Hamish IC Q#20433054 |
| The usual federal government employee disclaimer, blah blah blah... |
`-------------------------| Ready Aye Ready |-------------------------'
Ron Martino
> I saw a court once(Artemesia??) several years ago where it was Hip Hip
> Hooray.
> Berwyn
Iie. Artemisia uses three "Vivats." When the King and Queen were from
the Sun and holding court in the northern half of their kingdom, we
would generally follow the southern custom of "Hip Hip Huzzah." That's
what you might have heard.
Yumitori
Shawn Legere Dunham
kingdoms different? Here's a simple Q and A.
Which one is more prevalent, or grades in between, in your
Kingdom, Principality, Barony/Shire?
Vivat or Huzzah
Fighting or Arts
Costumes: Relaxed or Period Police
Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
Politics or Royalist
Please feel free to add anything I missed.
Brighid
Brian M. Scott
[snip]
> And enough of the perpetrators were also playing in the West
> Kingdom that the populace had to be restrained from giving pi
> cheers in Court.
Obviously more appropriate for demos anyway. Pi cheers at an
exhibition, anyone?
Talan
Dorothy J Heydt
Shawn Legere Dunham <Shawn...@imagin.net> wrote:
>I used that only as an example. What else makes your
>kingdoms different? Here's a simple Q and A.
>
>Which one is more prevalent, or grades in between, in your
>Kingdom, Principality, Barony/Shire?
From where I sit, West/Mists/Mists:
>Vivat or Huzzah
Huzzah/Hurrah [see previous post]
>Fighting or Arts
Both.
>Costumes: Relaxed or Period Police
Depends on the individual. We had a for-fun event this weekend,
the "Stealth Vs. Flash" tournament. "Flash" was headed by
Duquesa Juana Isabella de Montoya y Ramirez (ay ay ay!), whose
glorious clothing can be seen from blocks off and whose coronet
outshines the starry sky. "Stealth" was headed by the original
Stealth Duchess, Letitia de Scotia, who wears simple Normans and
whose coronet (which she always wears, to keep her veil on) has
strawberry leaves maybe half an inch high. Some of us dressed
up, some down, many silly fights and contests went on.
>Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
Anybody can wear a fillet, so long as it doesn't have certain
kinds of reserved points. Spurs are for Knights.
>Politics or Royalist
The King's Word is Law. (Of course, if the King speaks a word
that's really dumb, things can happen. For one thing, there are
an awful lot of hoary old Peers who will come around and say,
"You know, Your Majesty, that was really dumb. Why don't you
rescind it?")
Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin Dorothy J. Heydt
tigr...@epix.net
ForlornH wrote:
> >Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
> No cirlclet, no spurs for commoners.
I believe you are mistaken on this part. To my knowledge, there is no
sumptuary laws in AEthelmearc. Those without an AoA (which I assume is
your definition of "commoner") may certainly wear a circlet, plain or
fancy. When we were being elevated to barony status, we were concerned
about design for the coronets. We were told we could be as elaborate as
we wanted, and not to worry about them being "fancier that the Crowns."
As a point of courtesy I believe (just my opinion) that circlets worn by
those not of te nobility should be tastefully simple, but I would never
confront anyone on the grounds of headgear.
As to spurs: squires are allowed to wear them as well as knights. If a
squire does not yet have an armigerous award, they are still entitled to
wear the spurs, if their knight permits.
I hope this information will be helpful.
Baron Tigranes of Bezabde
Barony of Endless Hills, AEthelmearc
ForlornH
>kingdoms different? Here's a simple Q and A.
>
>Which one is more prevalent, or grades in between, in your
>Kingdom, Principality, Barony/Shire?
Vivat. The fifth Prince tried to change it to "Urra" without success.
>Fighting or Arts
Extremely well mixed on all levels and with a high level of caliber of both.
But then again, I live in a Barony of 250 people...
>Costumes: Relaxed or Period Police
Mostly relaxed here. Within the Kingdom it varies by region.
>Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
No cirlclet, no spurs for commoners. When I moved to the West in 1987 (and left
two years later) I was pulled aside (not so politely, mind you) by three
knights who wanted to know what the h**l I was doing wearing a silver chain
around my neck. Here, squires wear red belts and silver chains as opposed to
knights who wear white belts and gold chains. When I told them I was an
Easterner they backed off but did not apologize. It wasn't a very good first
impression of Western chivalry.
>Politics or Royalist
Depends on the reign but "popular" for the most part. There has been
Kingdom/local group tension in this part of the SCA for a very long time. There
once was a general opinion that a Territorial Baron is supreme on his own
territory (particularly when the political centre of the East was NYC/NJ and
400 miles distant) but this has been gradually eroded over the last 15 years or
so.
>
>Please feel free to add anything I missed.
Can't think of anything right now...depends on what more you really want to
know.
nic...@my-dejanews.com
In article <19981028121620...@ng147.aol.com>,
forl...@aol.com (ForlornH) wrote:
> >Ealdormere: Wassail
Or Was Hael, to give it the Anglo-Saxon spelling. (Only a few seem to
remember that the correct response to this is "Drink Hael"! Although why
anyone would want to drink Buffalo, NY is beyond me :-)
Nicolaa
Frequent visitor to the Hael
--
Visit the Library of St. Nicholas:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/5145
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Chris and Elisabeth Zakes
<sdu...@imagin.net> to write:
>I used that only as an example. What else makes your
>kingdoms different? Here's a simple Q and A.
>
>Which one is more prevalent, or grades in between, in your
>Kingdom, Principality, Barony/Shire?
I'm not sure what you're asking here.
>Vivat or Huzzah
Vivat. When someone receives an AoA, the person gets one "Vivat!" a
GoA gets two, peerage and above get three.
>Fighting or Arts
Yes.
>Costumes: Relaxed or Period Police
No.
>Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
>Politics or Royalist
Circlets and spurs are OK for commoners.
We don't have a Curia or similar body, "the Crown's word is law" (note
that it's *not* "the king's word..." In Ansteorra, the Consort has
equal rank with the Sovereign.)
-Tivar Moondragon
Ansteorra
C and E Zakes
Tivar Moondragon (Patience and Persistence)
and Aethelyan Moondragon (Decadence is its own reward)
moon...@bga.com
Aralyn67
Hi Uncle Calvert,
I don't think that "circlets are only for the armigerous" thing ever caught
on really and its specifically gold spurs that are customarily reserved for
knights. Anyone can wear silver ones, but mostly just squires wear them.
Those Faer Haga guys can't sneak up on nobody. cagink cagink cagink... :-)
Aralyn
ForlornH
>sumptuary laws in AEthelmearc. Those without an AoA (which I assume is
>your definition of "commoner") may certainly wear a circlet, plain or
>fancy. When we were being elevated to barony status, we were concerned
>about design for the coronets. We were told we could be as elaborate as
>we wanted, and not to worry about them being "fancier that the Crowns."
>As a point of courtesy I believe (just my opinion) that circlets worn by
>those not of te nobility should be tastefully simple, but I would never
>confront anyone on the grounds of headgear.
Your Excellency:
I believe you are correct but I have rarely seen anyone not of rank weaking a
circlet in AEthelmearc. I was commenting under the assumption that the original
poster was looking for what was common practice and not necessarily law. I
would never confront anyone over a circlet although I have seen quite a few
that resembled baronial coronets at first glance.
>As to spurs: squires are allowed to wear them as well as knights. If a
>squire does not yet have an armigerous award, they are still entitled to
>wear the spurs, if their knight permits.
I never wore any when I was a squire but then again I never asked to. I don't
recall offhand any squire in AEthelmearc ever wearing them.
>I hope this information will be helpful.
>
Always is...take care ;-)
ForlornH
Hi Kimmie!!!
> I don't think that "circlets are only for the armigerous" thing ever caught
>on really and its specifically gold spurs that are customarily reserved for
>knights.
I think I covered this in the response I made to Baron Tigranes' post. You're
both right but they are so rarely worn that I don't think it really matters
much...at least not to the original poster.
>Anyone can wear silver ones, but mostly just squires wear them.
>Those Faer Haga guys can't sneak up on nobody. cagink cagink cagink... :-)
That's why I never wore them...stealth fighter and all that ;-)
Irene Davis
<sdu...@imagin.net> writes:
>
>I used that only as an example. What else makes your
>kingdoms different? Here's a simple Q and A.
>
>Which one is more prevalent, or grades in between, in your
>Kingdom, Principality, Barony/Shire?
>Fighting or Arts
>Politics or Royalist
>
>
There is a HUGE difference between Kingdoms in the way that they run
archery. In the East it is taken VERY seriously, with organised
practises, arrow-making classes, etc. They use a marshallate to ensure
the safety of the tourneys and promote the study of proper technique.
Almost any respectable event has an archery tourney as part of the
proceedings. In the West there is no marshallate and there are
relatively few events with archery tourneys.
Eirny
nic...@my-dejanews.com
> >Vivat or Huzzah
Neither. Ealdormere uses Wassail/Was Hael
> >Fighting or Arts
Both, although Ealdormere's reputation while we were in the Middle was as a
place with a lot of good artisans; we have twice as many Laurels as Knights.
> >Costumes: Relaxed or Period Police
Relaxed, but generally seen by others as a higher standard than many other
places. We have a lot of people that make doing period stuff easy and fun,
and there's always people vying to have the niftiest garb out there.
> >Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
You can wear a circlet at your first event and very likely it won't be
commented on. I'll have to check our new Kingdom laws about whether they're
technically reserved for armigers. Anyone can wear spurs, although gold ones
are generally worn only by Knights and silver ones by squires (squires often
wear silver chains as well) but again, these are customs, not laws.
> >Politics or Royalist
We don't have any tradition that the Crown's Word is Law; instead, our
tradition is one of a very strong Territorial Baronage who act as the Crown's
deputies and are regarded as equal to the Peerage, even if they're technically
not. We have regular Ealdormere moots (by law, at least once per reign) and
have instituted the position of Lawspeaker to run the moots, as well as to act
as an arbitrator of disputes. However, this is not to say our Crown is not
well-respected--although we put a big emphasis on law, we believe that law is
the foundation of a kingdom and Crown and, administered wisely and with good
counsel, can make the Crown very strong indeed.
Nicolaa de Bracton
Ealdormere
Shella
Sometimes every one will yell Vivat! in unison and 10 minutes later
they will all yell Huzzah! also in unison. I think "vivat" is used
more ofter though.
Shella
ForlornH
>place with a lot of good artisans; we have twice as many Laurels as Knights.
>
We were always under the impression that it was very difficult job to get the
powers that be in the Middle to recognize Ealdormearan fighters. Roak had to
win Coronet three times before he got the belt.
>We don't have any tradition that the Crown's Word is Law; instead, our
>tradition is one of a very strong Territorial Baronage who act as the Crown's
>deputies and are regarded as equal to the Peerage, even if they're
>technically
>not.
I think this might be partly because of something that is uniquely
Ealdormearan: there is vitrually no territory in the Kingdom that does not fall
under one of the five baronies. I don't know of any other kingdom like that.
AEthelmearc has seven baronies but only one can be called a "regional" barony
(Blackstone Mountain). The other six are firmly entrenched in the metropolitan
area that is their centre (Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Johnstown,
Scranton). Only one of Ealdormeare's baronies can be called an "urban" barony
(Ben Dunfirth).
>although we put a big emphasis on law, we believe that law is
>the foundation of a kingdom and Crown and, administered wisely and with good
>counsel, can make the Crown very strong indeed.
IMHO, this is a "Good Thing"tm
Arval d'Espas Nord
> > >Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
We've already talked about circlets. Lady Laurel asked me to point out
that there is no Society-wide regulation of spurs. As far as the
corporation is concerned, anyone can wear 'em. But kingdom law can take
precedence in this case, since the corporation has not barred such laws.
===========================================================================
Arval d'Espas Nord mit...@panix.com
Jay Rudin
Michael and Queen Rebekah, and King Artan and Queen Tara. At the start of the
court, the Ansteorran herald was calling for Vivats and the Outlandish herald
was calling for Huzzahs. Then the Ansteorran Crown called up an Outlander to
honor, and the A. herald called a Huzzah. The O. herald picked up on it and
started leading Vivats for Ansteorrans.
At the end of court, the Outlands herald led the cheers for the Ansteorran
Crown, and the Ansteorran herald did the same for the Ansteorran Crown.
Vivat and Huzzah for Master Erasmiersz Waspanieski and Mistress Adelicia
Gilwell, two heralds who each honored the *other* kingdom's customs.
Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
Hern
>
<snip>
>
> Vivat and Huzzah for Master Erasmiersz Waspanieski and Mistress Adelicia
> Gilwell, two heralds who each honored the *other* kingdom's customs.
>
Indeed! And a "hoobah" for good measure.
your servant,
Cumhail
Jay Rudin
> I used that only as an example. What else makes your
> kingdoms different?
What makes my kingdom different? *I* do. I and my fellow Ansteorrans.
One of the character notes of Ansteorra is that we are a people, not
just a regional division of a corporation. (The word "Scadian" marks
one as a visitor, for instance.)
> Which one is more prevalent, or grades in between, in your
> Kingdom, Principality, Barony/Shire?
> Vivat or Huzzah
Vivat!
> Fighting or Arts
You betcha! Fighting and arts.
> Costumes: Relaxed or Period Police
Both, of course.
> Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
A circlet undre 3/8" is just a veil holder. Above that, it's a
coronet. Spurs matter to some people; I'm not one of them. (Near as I
can tell, there are only three times in ones life that wearing spurs is
appropriate: riding a horse, posing for a portrait, or being knighted.
I think people walking around in spurs look silly.)
> Politics or Royalist
When things are going very well, the populace is fiercely royalist and
the royalty are just as strongly populist. When the teeter-totter goes
the other way, we get infighting, stupid politics, etc.
Dr Tiomoid M. of Angle
> > Fighting or Arts
>
> You betcha! Fighting and arts.
Not to mention the times when people fight about the arts and develop
fighting into a fine art....
================================================================================
Fra Tadhg Liath OFT ta...@bigfoot.com
The Grumpiest Pelican
co...@apexgrp.com
about differences in general...however, since no other Atlantian has come
forth yet...
At each of the events I've attended, the shout is "Vivat/Vivant"
-Elisabeth (of Lochmere)
nic...@my-dejanews.com
In article <19981029101811...@ng116.aol.com>,
forl...@aol.com (ForlornH) wrote:
> >Both, although Ealdormere's reputation while we were in the Middle was as a
> >place with a lot of good artisans; we have twice as many Laurels as Knights.
> >
>
> We were always under the impression that it was very difficult job to get the
> powers that be in the Middle to recognize Ealdormearan fighters. Roak had to
> win Coronet three times before he got the belt.
Might have been a bit of that happening; but I suppose we always wondered why
there never seemed to be as big a problem with Laurels. The year I was
elevated, there were seven Ealdormerians done within the space of, I believe,
ten months. While that was a bit unusual, Laurels have always considerably
outnumbered knights; back when I joined, there were something like 18 Laurels
and four knights in Ealdormere.
Nicolaa de Bracton
Six of Seven
--
Visit the Library of St. Nicholas:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/5145
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
DeSevyngy
In article <19981028125057...@ngol03.aol.com>, dese...@aol.com
(DeSevyngy) writes:
>
>Vivat Artemisia!
>Huzzah Caid! (well, its been a few years, but I think they still huzzah) ;)
>
>HL Isabeau de Sevyngy
>
As I look at this I realize that I should add that the Herald ends the three
"Vivat"s with "Joyous noise", I like this part. Lots and lots of noise!
Clapping, table banging, stomping, yelling, whooping, you get the picture. :)
HL Isabeau de Sevyngy
Squired to Sir Sakura kita no Maikeru
Barony of Loch Salann
Artemisia
de...@goodnet.com
>Or Was Hael, to give it the Anglo-Saxon spelling. (Only a few seem to
>remember that the correct response to this is "Drink Hael"! Although why
>anyone would want to drink Buffalo, NY is beyond me :-)
>
>Nicolaa
>Frequent visitor to the Hael
Shouldn't just be a few -- should be anyone who admits to reading
Holmes's Daily Living in the Twelfth Century, or his sources: John of
Salisbury, Gaimar's Estoire des Engleis, or Giraldus.
-- della
Andrews
DeSevyngy <dese...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19981028125057...@ngol03.aol.com>...
>
> In article <36365826...@imagin.net>, Shawn Legere Dunham
> <sdu...@imagin.net> writes:
>
> >I'm curious which Kingdoms say Huzzah and which ones say
> >Vivat.
>
> Vivat Artemisia!
> Huzzah Caid! (well, its been a few years, but I think they still huzzah)
;)
>
> HL Isabeau de Sevyngy
> Lady Isabeau de Sevyngy
> Squired to Sir Sakura kita no Maikeru
> Barony of Loch Salann
> Artemisia
>
yes but what about "More Hops" and "Au Gratin"
Lord Guilluame f
Formetly of Artemesia now residing in Caid
ForlornH
>>remember that the correct response to this is "Drink Hael"! Although why
>>anyone would want to drink Buffalo, NY is beyond me :-)
It's because we have good brewers...
Ian Gourdon
Royalty, and TRH, then the salute varied, from vivat to skoll, depending
on the monarch in question. The Northshield and Ealdormere certainly
weren't hoobah. Perhaps usage varies?
Forester Ian Gourdon
Monaleek wrote:
>
> >Kingdoms say Huzzah and which ones say
>
> >Vivat.
>
> Lets see. In Meridies it's Hip Hip Hooray and the Middle says Hoobah.
>
> I remember one time in Ansteorra making a compromise of Vivat and Hoorah it
> was Hevit But it never really caught on.
>
> Genevieve McCullum
--
Forester Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe
http://web.raex.com/~agincort
Ian Gourdon
without the embellishment of pearls or points, anyone can wear them.
With Knights, it is an element of their office, but is not regulated
specifically, (except that they are gold) without the gold chain and
white belt. Suires have similar rules, except that they wear silver
equipage, and a red belt.
Now, the question of whether one is 'socially gifted', to wear such
freely, is another question. As with the wearing of swords, not actually
proscribed, but custom, most places.
In my area of 'badge of office', I might well question, not someone
wearing a green hood, but someone in the Midrealm, wearing a green hood
with an engrailed bottom, trimed in white, and a border in red and white
around the face area. Here in the Midrealm, that is reserved to the
Foresters. Would I try to tear their trim off? Hmmm, no. But I might ask
them to show their prowess by dueling with me at the archery range...
Forester Ian Gourdon
Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
...
> >Commoner: Circlet or No Circlet, Spurs or No Spurs
> Anybody can wear a fillet, so long as it doesn't have certain
> kinds of reserved points. Spurs are for Knights.
> Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin
Dorothy J Heydt
Ian Gourdon <agin...@raex.com> wrote:
>I understand that spurs are not just for Knights. Like metal headbands,
>without the embellishment of pearls or points, anyone can wear them.
This is a ... Difference between Kingdoms.
In the West, spurs are worn by Knights only and although they
know intellectually it's different in other Kingdoms, they still
get very annoyed when they see them on non-Knights. (At Cynagua
Coronet yesterday, it being also Halloween, Crown Prince Garick
wore his regular clothes, spurs, chain, and a borrowed red belt,
and went as a Midrealm squire.)
>With Knights, it is an element of their office, but is not regulated
>specifically, (except that they are gold) without the gold chain and
>white belt. Suires have similar rules, except that they wear silver
>equipage, and a red belt.
Again... it would help to specify what Kingdom you're posting
from, in which this is true.
Dr Tiomoid M. of Angle
> (At Cynagua
> Coronet yesterday, it being also Halloween, Crown Prince Garick
> wore his regular clothes, spurs, chain, and a borrowed red belt,
> and went as a Midrealm squire.)
No doubt there are those in the Midrealm who would consider that about
right.... :-)
================================================================================
"What all the wise men promised has not happened -- and what all the damned
fools said would happen has come to pass."
-- Lord Melbourne
================================================================================
Tiomoid M. of Angle ta...@bigfoot.com
Timothy A. McDaniel
Really. In other places, even non-knights are allowed to do
equestrian activites. Or do your horsemen not use spurs?
Daniel "Yes, I know: pick, pick, pick" de Lincolia
--
Tim McDaniel (home); Reply-To: tm...@crl.com;
if that fail, tm...@austin.ibm.com is my work address.
Zebee Johnstone
Timothy A. McDaniel <tm...@crl.com> wrote:
>In article <F1r9I...@kithrup.com>,
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>In the West, spurs are worn by Knights only
>
>Really. In other places, even non-knights are allowed to do
>equestrian activites. Or do your horsemen not use spurs?
Never used them in many years of riding. Except when riding buckjumpers
and that was because the rules required them.
Other than that, I only needed my hands, my legs, and the occasional
discreet movement of a riding crop where the horse could see it.
Spurs can have their uses, but they aren't required any more than
curb bits are...
Silfren
Arval d'Espas Nord
> In my area of 'badge of office', I might well question, not someone
> wearing a green hood, but someone in the Midrealm, wearing a green hood
> with an engrailed bottom, trimed in white, and a border in red and white
> around the face area. Here in the Midrealm, that is reserved to the
> Foresters.
What on earth is a Forester?
Fvigil
>
>What on earth is a Forester?
The Foresters of the Greenwood Company is a Midrealm archery award. Ther
Greenwood Company wa crated by HRM Tarquin (sp?) during his reign 2-3 years
ago. It is modeled after the Sargeants of the Red Company (the Middle's
fighting award).
*****************************************
Sir Fernando Rodriguez de Falcon,
Baron of Three Rivers - Calontir, OP
*****************************************
Arval d'Espas Nord
> The Foresters of the Greenwood Company is a Midrealm archery award. Ther
> Greenwood Company wa crated by HRM Tarquin (sp?) during his reign 2-3 years
> ago. It is modeled after the Sargeants of the Red Company (the Middle's
> fighting award).
Thanks. But it isn't a personal title, right?
nic...@my-dejanews.com
In article <71nbuf$o...@panix5.panix.com>,
mit...@panix.com wrote:
>
> > The Foresters of the Greenwood Company is a Midrealm archery award. Ther
> > Greenwood Company wa crated by HRM Tarquin (sp?) during his reign 2-3 years
> > ago. It is modeled after the Sargeants of the Red Company (the Middle's
> > fighting award).
>
> Thanks. But it isn't a personal title, right?
Because the Seargeants of the Red Company usually use the title "Seargeant",
I've heard Forester used in the same way in formal correspondance. But I've
never heard anyone addressed as "Hey Forester Bob, betcha can't hit that tree
over there."
Nicolaa de Bracton
Fvigil
>> Greenwood Company wa crated by HRM Tarquin (sp?) during his reign 2-3 years
>> ago. It is modeled after the Sargeants of the Red Company (the Middle's
>> fighting award).
>
>Thanks. But it isn't a personal title, right?
I think they do in fact use both Forrester and Sargeant as de-facto titles.
Fernando
Arval d'Espas Nord
> I think they do in fact use both Forrester and Sargeant as de-facto titles.
"Sargeant" was a military title, of course, but "forester" was a job
description, not a personal rank. Since neither implies rank historically,
either one is available to anyone in the Society under Corpora VII.C.4
Styles of Unrecognized Titles. But if a kingdom attaches them to an award,
it is effectively creating a title of rank. The Board reserves that
authority to itself.
Ian Gourdon
average squire, even out here beyond the ever essential salt-water
zones...
--
Jay Rudin
> > I think they do in fact use both Forrester and Sargeant as de-facto titles.
>
> "Sargeant" was a military title, of course, but "forester" was a job
> description, not a personal rank. Since neither implies rank historically,
> either one is available to anyone in the Society under Corpora VII.C.4 Styles
> of Unrecognized Titles. But if a kingdom attaches them to an award, it is
> effectively creating a title of rank.
Effectively, perhaps, but not legally. If the King declares in court that all
members of the Order of the Sable Widget shall be called "snuggle-bunnies", then
loyal subjects will call them "snuggle-bunnies". That does not make
"snuggle-bunny" a title of rank.
> The Board reserves that authority to itself.
Which reservation has as much or as little validity as we choose to give it -- a
principle that has been very competently defended by Master Arval on numerous
occasions.
The Crown can establish that a group of people are called "snuggle-bunnies", or
"Foresters", or whatever, and it's law. But, since it is technically not made a
title that way, that does not give snuggle-bunny rights to the equivalent people
in the next kingdom.
Calontir calls the members of its grant-level fighting order "Huscarls". The
Ansteorran equivalent is "Centurions". It's a custom, not a declaration of title
equivalency.
Centurion Robin of Gilwell / Snuggle-bunny Rudin
Ian Gourdon
"Holders of the Order shall be entitled to place
after their names the initials, C.G.C. and may be styled and
announced in precedence as Companion of the order of the
Greenwood Company. Those holders of the Order may be
styled and announced as Foresters of the Greenwood."
nic...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> Greetings!
>
> In article <71nbuf$o...@panix5.panix.com>,
> mit...@panix.com wrote:
> >
> > > The Foresters of the Greenwood Company is a Midrealm archery award. Ther
> > > Greenwood Company wa crated by HRM Tarquin (sp?) during his reign 2-3 years
> > > ago. It is modeled after the Sargeants of the Red Company (the Middle's
> > > fighting award).
> >
> > Thanks. But it isn't a personal title, right?
>
> Because the Seargeants of the Red Company usually use the title "Seargeant",
> I've heard Forester used in the same way in formal correspondance. But I've
> never heard anyone addressed as "Hey Forester Bob, betcha can't hit that tree
> over there."
>
> Nicolaa de Bracton
> --
> Visit the Library of St. Nicholas:
> http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/5145
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
--
obsi...@raex.com
>Greetings!
>
>In article <71nbuf$o...@panix5.panix.com>,
> mit...@panix.com wrote:
>>
>> > The Foresters of the Greenwood Company is a Midrealm archery award. Ther
>> > Greenwood Company wa crated by HRM Tarquin (sp?) during his reign 2-3 years
>> > ago. It is modeled after the Sargeants of the Red Company (the Middle's
>> > fighting award).
>>
>> Thanks. But it isn't a personal title, right?
>
>Because the Seargeants of the Red Company usually use the title "Seargeant",
>I've heard Forester used in the same way in formal correspondance. But I've
>never heard anyone addressed as "Hey Forester Bob, betcha can't hit that tree
>over there."
Greetings
Usage within formal correspondance is how I've seen it myself.
Certainly that's how I use it. If I am speaking as an archer or
regional marshal, or if I'm in a situation where I need to emphasize
my connection with archery, I'm likely to use "Forester" as part of an
intro or a signature, in replacement of the generic AoA "Lord".
My impression is that it is not exclusively retained by the members of
the Order, we have no binding patent upon the label. But if I see the
term used, I generally assume that the person so refered to is, in
fact, a member of the Order. But then too, I would probably recognize
the name anyway, since there aren't very many of us.
Forester Nigel FitzMaurice
Ex Tenebra, Lux
http://web.raex.com/~obsidian/index.html
Ian Gourdon
http://web.raex.com/~agincort/greenwood.html
should satisfy the curious on the matter of the Midrealm's rules
concerning the Foresters.
Fvigil wrote:
>
> >> The Foresters of the Greenwood Company is a Midrealm archery award. Ther
> >> Greenwood Company wa crated by HRM Tarquin (sp?) during his reign 2-3 years
> >> ago. It is modeled after the Sargeants of the Red Company (the Middle's
> >> fighting award).
> >
> >Thanks. But it isn't a personal title, right?
>
> I think they do in fact use both Forrester and Sargeant as de-facto titles.
>
> Fernando
>
> *****************************************
> Sir Fernando Rodriguez de Falcon,
> Baron of Three Rivers - Calontir, OP
> *****************************************
--
Arval d'Espas Nord
Greetings from Arval!
Ian Gourdon posted:
> Here's an excerpt from Midrealm law: "Holders of the Order shall be
> entitled to place after their names the initials, C.G.C. and may be
> styled and announced in precedence as Companion of the order of the
> Greenwood Company. Those holders of the Order may be styled and announced
> as Foresters of the Greenwood."
Thanks, Ian. This law does not authorize the use of "Forester" as a
personal title, and that's proper. I should point out that individuals are
certainly free to use this style, since it does not imply rank or landed
jurisdiction in any way (although I think it's not an authentic usage; more
on that below).
Robin of Gilwell replied to me:
me> But if a kingdom attaches them to an award, it is effectively creating
me> a title of rank.
RG> Effectively, perhaps, but not legally.
You seem to be arguing that since titles can only be defined by the Board,
anything else, no matter how it is used, is not a title. If I've missed
your point, please correct me.
If the king says 'I am giving you this award, which entitles you to call
yourself "Snugglebunny Robin"', then the king has undoubtedly given you a
title and that is undoubtedly a violation of Corpora. Whether or not we
care about that violation of Corpora is another issue. I don't (as you
guessed), but I really hate to see yet another public-domain term co-opted
by the award system. I also hate to see new inauthentic titles introduced
to the Society.
"Forester" is a fine period job-description. A forester is a guy who
manages a forest for its owner, often the king. Johnne who was a forester
might well have been called "Johnne Forester". In one special case, the
word was used as a title -- the OED says that "Forester of the King of
France" was an early title of the governor of Flanders. That's definitely
not an appropriate model for the usage we're considering, though it would
be a cool alternate title for a baron or prince. In general, "forester"
was not a title, nor was it a rank. It was an office, like "pursuivant".
The head of a military company of archers was probably called "Captain" or
"Sergeant", just like the head of a military company of pikemen.
Robert P Davis
Unto all herein,
Greeting!
On 3 Nov 1998, Arval d'Espas Nord wrote:
>
> > I think they do in fact use both Forrester and Sargeant as de-facto titles.
>
> "Sargeant" was a military title, of course, but "forester" was a job
> description, not a personal rank. Since neither implies rank historically,
> either one is available to anyone in the Society under Corpora VII.C.4
> Styles of Unrecognized Titles.
[snip, since I don't have a clue about all the other stuff]
I take issue that "Sergeant" is not, historically, a military rank.
According to books I've read on the Military Orders (Templar and
Hospitaler), sergeants were mounted warriors not of knightly rank. This
implies a certain military superiority to the lowly foot-slogging grunts.
I dunno if the title was used in period as a definite rank title; I *do*
know it was in use as early as the 17th century in the British army as a
title for a veteran private soldier who had nominal charge of his men (and
usually served under a subaltern or "lieutenant").
Pax,
-R
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Random Tagline:
"And God said: E = mv - Ze/r ...and there *WAS* light!"
+--------------------------+---------------------+
| Robert Davis, Student of | Robert MacDaibhidh, |
| Music and History at | Creative |
| Mansfield University | Anachronist |
+--------------------------+---------------------+
| Shire of Abhainn Ciach Ghlais, AEthelmearc. |
+------------------------------------------------+
| http://mustuweb.mnsfld.edu/users/davisr/ |
+------------------------------------------------+
hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu
: Here's an excerpt from Midrealm law:
: "Holders of the Order shall be entitled to place
: after their names the initials, C.G.C. and may be styled and
: announced in precedence as Companion of the order of the
: Greenwood Company. Those holders of the Order may be
: styled and announced as Foresters of the Greenwood."
<SNIP>
: --
: Forester Ian Gourdon of Glen Awe
: http://web.raex.com/~agincort
So now I'm confused -- is the usage "<personal name> Forester of the
Greenwood" or is it "Forester <personal name>"?
Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn
--
*********************************************************
PLEASE NOTE ==> New E-mail address
WAS <hrj...@uclink.berkeley.edu>
NOW IS <hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu>
^^^^^^^^
**********************************************************
patrick anderson
<hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>So now I'm confused -- is the usage "<personal name> Forester of the
>Greenwood" or is it "Forester <personal name>"?
>
>Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn
Technically it is SUPPOSED TO BE <personal name> Forester of the
Greenwood. However, due to whatever reason, it tends to become Forester
<personal name> in practice.
Jibra'il al-Nasrani
Northshield
Midrealm
Lady Val
energetic "Vivat !!!" is heard exclusively.
The fighting and arts are just about equal in our Barony and Kingdom both. In
oour Barony we have three knights, 2 Laurels, several "Sable Thistles" (a
lower level Arts/Sciences award), and a few "Irises".(a Grant level award).
While our fighters are practicing, several people do A & S things, like
painting scrolls, calligraphy, weaving, jewelry making.
There are quite a few people who are pretty accomplished costumers, but no one
lookss with scorn if the garb is not late period or completely historically
accurate.Many people remember that this is a fun weekend hobby to be enjoyed.
Commoners dont generally wear circlets. Over across the border in Meridies,
persons with an AoA do wear thin circlets. Knights dont usually wear spurs
here, although I have seen one or two with them.
Hope this helps.
Baroness Valencia Carlota Maria de Granada
Lady Val @ aol.com
Dr Tiomoid M. of Angle
> > "Sargeant" was a military title, of course, but "forester" was a job
> > description, not a personal rank. Since neither implies rank historically,
> > either one is available to anyone in the Society under Corpora VII.C.4
> > Styles of Unrecognized Titles.
> I take issue that "Sergeant" is not, historically, a military rank.
> According to books I've read on the Military Orders (Templar and
> Hospitaler), sergeants were mounted warriors not of knightly rank. This
> implies a certain military superiority to the lowly foot-slogging grunts.
Well, to begin with, there weren't any "lowly foot-slogging grunts" in the
military religious orders (not as members of the order, anyway). "Serjeant"
was a medieval term for a servant of some sort, and was used in many
contexts, military and otherwise. Just because they had cooks doesn't make
"cook" a "military rank"; nor "chaplain" for that matter, which the
military religious orders also had.
(I'd post the definition of "serjeant" for you but apparently the link we
were given to the OED2 on the Web, http://pleth.princeton.edu/OED/oed.html,
has been disabled.)
================================================================================
Fra Tadhg Liath OFT ta...@bigfoot.com
The Grumpiest Pelican
nic...@my-dejanews.com
In article <363F76D8...@nortel.ca>,
Jay Rudin <jru...@nortel.ca> wrote:
> > "Sargeant" was a military title, of course, but "forester" was a job
> > description, not a personal rank. Since neither implies rank historically,
> > either one is available to anyone in the Society under Corpora VII.C.4
Styles
> > of Unrecognized Titles. But if a kingdom attaches them to an award, it is
> > effectively creating a title of rank.
> The Crown can establish that a group of people are called "snuggle-bunnies",
or
> "Foresters", or whatever, and it's law. But, since it is technically not
made a
> title that way, that does not give snuggle-bunny rights to the equivalent
people
> in the next kingdom.
>
> Calontir calls the members of its grant-level fighting order "Huscarls". The
> Ansteorran equivalent is "Centurions". It's a custom, not a declaration of
title
> equivalency.
>
> Centurion Robin of Gilwell / Snuggle-bunny Rudin
This is an important point. Just because one kingdom has an award that calls
folks "Snugglebunnies" doesn't mean that title is now out of the public domain
for all kingdoms.
You'll note also that the laws for the Greenwood Company do not actually give
recipients the title of "Forester Biff Crossbow"--rather, the proper usage
would be "Biff Crossbow, Forester of the Greenwood Company". Using it as a
personal title before the name is simply a custom, and not all of the folks I
know with that particular award follow it.
Heath Barker
enjoyed.
<Bow> Your Majesty...
I must stick my Two cents in yipppeeee. I have been in for only a couple
weeks and have already found many people that have forgotten that this is
for fun.
Jay Rudin
work for you; a serjeant is someone who vacationed in Paris first.
Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
Arval d'Espas Nord
Greetings from Arval! I wrote:
> "Sargeant" was a military title, of course, but "forester" was a job
> description, not a personal rank. Since neither implies rank historically,
> either one is available to anyone in the Society under Corpora VII.C.4
> Styles of Unrecognized Titles.
Robert MacDiabhidh replied:
> I take issue that "Sergeant" is not, historically, a military rank.
Sorry, I was unclear enough (though I did say that it is a military rank in
the previous sentence). What I meant was that "Serjeant" is not a noble
rank, which is the point relevent to that passage of Corpora.
Robert P Davis
> > I take issue that "Sergeant" is not, historically, a military rank.
> > According to books I've read on the Military Orders (Templar and
> > Hospitaler), sergeants were mounted warriors not of knightly rank. This
> > implies a certain military superiority to the lowly foot-slogging grunts.
>
> Well, to begin with, there weren't any "lowly foot-slogging grunts" in the
> military religious orders (not as members of the order, anyway).
The Hospitalers (at least; I don't remember about the Templars) used
levied infantry. Who controlled them? One imagines there was an
intermediate rank between the true Knight and the lowly grunt, but that
may be my socialized brain applying a modern heirarchal concept to a
period custom.
> "Serjeant"
> was a medieval term for a servant of some sort, and was used in many
> contexts, military and otherwise. Just because they had cooks doesn't make
> "cook" a "military rank"; nor "chaplain" for that matter, which the
> military religious orders also had.
I see! My brain is full. Must chew. ;)
Berwyn
Here's another strand.
This summer, at an event in Northshield (Midrealm), a number of gentles
from Artemesia and An-Tir were present. One fighter, who happens to be a
Companion of the Pelican, objected when he was announced to the list as
"Master Michael". His reason was that the Pelican is not a fighting
order, hence the title "Master" is not appropriate in a fighting
context. Aparently thats how its done in Avecal.
This struck me as a bit odd. Knighthood is not an arts award, but we
still announce Sir Tarrach as the A&S winner. Why should companions of
the Laural or Pelican discard their well deserved titles when taking
part in activites not specific to their orders?
Any other kingdoms have this custom?
Berwyn
-
Lord Berwyn AEthelbryght of Ackley
Rudivale, Northshield, Midrealm
Bert Garwood, Grand Forks, ND
AlexdeSet
When I lived in Fair Caid 5 years ago, tournaments were commonly heralded at
each combat. The tradition is that only honors won on the field are announced.
That is, Master of the Laurel Bob would be announced as "Bob"; Mistress of the
Pelican Jane would be announced as "Jane"; members of the Chivalry -Sir Fred,
for instance, would be announced as "Sir Fred". Tiltles won in combat (Counts.
Viscounts, Dukes,etc) are announced, but other awards are not.
Is mise le meas,
Alexander de Seton
Dorothy J Heydt
AlexdeSet <alex...@aol.com> wrote:
>When I lived in Fair Caid 5 years ago, tournaments were commonly heralded at
>each combat. The tradition is that only honors won on the field are announced.
That's done in the West also. No bets on which picked up the
custom from which.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
_A Point of Honor_ is out....
Arval d'Espas Nord
Greetings from Arval!
> When I lived in Fair Caid 5 years ago, tournaments were commonly heralded at
> each combat. The tradition is that only honors won on the field are
> announced.
I've run across that tradition, and I think it's a bad one. It is a
vestige of the "Knights are more important than other peers" attitude. On
the face of it, it may seem reasonable, but consider that it isn't applied
equitably: I rather doubt that that any knights, counts, or dukes discard
their titles when they enter the feast hall, the dance hall, royal court,
Curia, or any other non-fighting activity.
It is courteous to recognize everyone for their accomplishments, regardless
of the venue.
Fvigil
>Ansteorran equivalent is "Centurions". It's a custom, not a declaration of
>title
>equivalency.
Huscarl is never used as a title - as in Huscarl <insert name here>. Sargeant
and Forrester are at least sometimes used that way in the Middle.
Jay Rudin
> AdEN> But if a kingdom attaches them to an award, it is
> AdEN> effectively creating a title of rank.
>
> RG> Effectively, perhaps, but not legally.
>
> You seem to be arguing that since titles can only be defined by the Board,
> anything else, no matter how it is used, is not a title. If I've missed your
> point, please correct me.
OK, I'll correct you. My point is that merely being in front of a name does
not turn an English word into a title. The first words of "Fireman Bob",
"Bronco Bill", "Injun Joe", "Baby Snookums", "Ranger Rick", "Goodwife Alice",
and "Minnesota Fats" are not titles. The word "title" does not mean either
"term assigned by the BoD" nor "any word placed before a name". The truth,
unsurprisingly, is more complicated than that.
> If the king says 'I am giving you this award, which entitles you to call
> yourself "Snugglebunny Robin"', then the king has undoubtedly given you a
> title and that is undoubtedly a violation of Corpora.
Thank you for a perfect example, friend Arval. (Uh-oh. Now "friend" is a
title, and only certain people can use it.) If the king asks his kingdom to
call all members of a certain order "Snugglebunny [Name]", he is establishing a
custom for that order. If he then states that anyone of equal rank may call
themselves so, and nobody else can do so, then he is making a title. For
instance, I cannot insist that I be announced as "Centurion Robin" in a foreign
court. I can insist on "Master Robin", because it's a title. Ansteorran
heralds will announce me as Centurion, not because I have that as a title, but
because the Crown asked them to. Kingdom custom, not award structure.
If an Ansteorran with a Roman persona led 100 men to Gulf War, he could call
himself a centurion (note the small "c"). He can even call himself centurion
Gaius. (It takes a very careful ear to hear the difference between "Centurion
Gaius" and "centurion Gaius".) This has been discussed in a meeting of the
Centurions of the Sable Star, who know that they cannot claim ownership of a
common english word.
Another difference is that the king can take it away tomorrow. I have the
right to the title "Master", and the next king can't take that away. It's a
title. The Crown currently allows me to be called "Centurion" in court, but a
simple law change can remove it -- it is merely a statutory or customary
privilege, not a title that I own. It's like the difference in my rights to my
IRA, in which I have clear title, and my merely statutory rights to Social
Security, which can be legally removed by a simple change in the law.
> Whether or not we care about that violation of Corpora is another issue. I
> don't (as you guessed), but I really hate to see yet another public-domain
> term co-opted by the award system. I also hate to see new inauthentic titles
> introduced
> to the Society.
Agreed. But I make a distinction between a term co-opted by the award system,
and a term used by a group of SCA members, even if that group is defined by an
order. I'm quite sensitive to the inauthentic title problem, and don't use
Centurion that way -- but others in the order do, and the king said they
could. (By the way, I argued that it was a poor name for the order when it was
first established. I lost.)
> "Forester" is a fine period job-description. A forester is a guy who manages
> a forest for its owner, often the king. Johnne who was a forester might well
> have been called "Johnne Forester".
Agreed. Some years ago an Ansteorran archer asked my opinion about a proposed
guild structure for archers with ranks that went from Yeoman to Bowyer to
Forester to Master Bowyer. I pointed out that it was a jumble that mixed rank
with inconsistent job descriptions, and that none of it meant "archer of a
level of certain proficiency". Who is a better archer, a man who manages
forests or a man who makes bows?
AlexdeSet
Thanks for the valuable input and all that milord Arval, but thats the way it
is in Caid.
Rather presumptuous, I think, to say someone else's tradition is a "bad" one,
when the innocent answer to a straightforward question about different
kingdom's traditions is put forth.
Not to say that >your< opinion is "bad" or "wrong", just isn't called for in
this specific case, in my opinion.
Arval d'Espas Nord
Greetings from Arval!
I didn't realize you'd posted this as well as mailed it to me.
> Thanks for the valuable input and all that milord Arval, but thats the
> way it is in Caid. Rather presumptuous, I think, to say someone else's
> tradition is a "bad" one, when the innocent answer to a straightforward
> question about different kingdom's traditions is put forth.
Sorry, but I disagree. You can play any way you like, but if I think
you're making a mistake, I'll say so. In this case, Caid is reinforcing
the very bad custom of treating fighting peers as better than others.
Anything posted here, on this public forum, is offered for consideration by
the entire community. Criticism is expected.
Jay Rudin
> When I lived in Fair Caid 5 years ago, tournaments were commonly heralded at
> each combat. The tradition is that only honors won on the field are announced.
> ,That is, Master of the Laurel Bob would be announced as "Bob"; Mistress of the
> Pelican Jane would be announced as "Jane"; members of the Chivalry -Sir Fred,
> for instance, would be announced as "Sir Fred". Tiltles won in combat (Counts.
> Viscounts, Dukes,etc) are announced, but other awards are not.
Apropos of the discussion of titles between me and Arval elsewhere in this
thread: From the Ansteorran perspective, this is treating "Master" as if it is
*not* a title, but merely as a customary mode of address to be used in certain
circumstances. If "Master" is a title, then I can always use it. Caid and the
West, obviously, disagree with this perspective.
hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu
: This thread has potential to go in a lot of interesting directions.
: Here's another strand.
: This summer, at an event in Northshield (Midrealm), a number of gentles
: from Artemesia and An-Tir were present. One fighter, who happens to be a
: Companion of the Pelican, objected when he was announced to the list as
: "Master Michael". His reason was that the Pelican is not a fighting
: order, hence the title "Master" is not appropriate in a fighting
: context. Aparently thats how its done in Avecal.
: This struck me as a bit odd. Knighthood is not an arts award, but we
: still announce Sir Tarrach as the A&S winner. Why should companions of
: the Laural or Pelican discard their well deserved titles when taking
: part in activites not specific to their orders?
: Any other kingdoms have this custom?
The West kingdom, alas, shares the custom of declaring that "only fighting
titles" may be announced on the field of combat. Of course, the
application is somewhat hypocritically inconsistant. For example:
- Royal peerage titles of past sovereigns are announced on the field, but
royal peerage titles are not gained by _fighting_ but rather by
successfully reigning. (The title of a currently-reigning sovereign, e.g.,
"king", was gained by fighting, but the title of a former monarch, e.g.,
"Duke" was gained by successfully reigning.) Thus, the titles of royal
peers -- which, according to law, bear no differentiation in whether the
bearer was a sovereign or consort -- are treated differentially under this
custom.
- As others have noted, a similar restriction is not placed on other
fields of endeavor. People teaching A&S classes are not restricted to
useing titles gained via A&S activities; people autocratting events or
holding office are not restricted to titles gained via service; etc.
- Popular opinion (and practice -- if no one with a clue is paying
attention) includes non-titles such as "squire" and "sergeant" among those
styles that custom allows to be announced on the field.
The only attempt I have ever heard at an "objective" motivation for this
practice was along the lines of, "If you're announced as 'master' I might
mistakenly assume you were a master of arms and hit you too hard." While
such a line of reasoning provides interesting fields for speculation about
potential problems in behavior on the field, it has serious flaws as a
convincing argument for the current custom.
This sort of arbitrarily discriminatory practice was what, many years ago,
convinced me that the Crown of the West, as an institution, had broken
faith with me and dissolved my fealty. Not this one particular custom, but
many, many little straws of this sort laid repeatedly on the back of my
oath.
(Who, me? Have opinions on the topic?)
Bryan J. Maloney
alex...@aol.com (AlexdeSet) wrote:
> Greetings!
> When I lived in Fair Caid 5 years ago, tournaments were commonly heralded at
> each combat. The tradition is that only honors won on the field are announced.
> That is, Master of the Laurel Bob would be announced as "Bob"; Mistress of the
> Pelican Jane would be announced as "Jane"; members of the Chivalry -Sir Fred,
> for instance, would be announced as "Sir Fred". Tiltles won in combat (Counts.
> Viscounts, Dukes,etc) are announced, but other awards are not.
This is, of course, because the three Orders of the "Peerage" in the SCA
are equal, but one is more equal than the others.
--
What you say may very well be true, but it may also very well be irrelevant.
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/bjm10/
Cumhail
> > When I lived in Fair Caid 5 years ago, tournaments were commonly heralded at
> > each combat. The tradition is that only honors won on the field are
> > announced.
>
Arval d'Espas Nord wrote:
> I've run across that tradition, and I think it's a bad one. It is a
> vestige of the "Knights are more important than other peers" attitude. On
> the face of it, it may seem reasonable, but consider that it isn't applied
> equitably: I rather doubt that that any knights, counts, or dukes discard
> their titles when they enter the feast hall, the dance hall, royal court,
> Curia, or any other non-fighting activity.
>
> It is courteous to recognize everyone for their accomplishments, regardless
> of the venue.
I've never come acrossed that tradition, and it sounds ludicrous.
Granted, I left Caid 8 years ago, but my Lady was heralded at every
tourny she fought in as "mistress" and she certainly never wore a white
baldric. If our titles (society level, at least)are to mean anything at
all, then they must be recognized all the time. As Arval infers, a
knight/pelican up to his elbows in dishwater is still a knight. A
laurel in a helmet is still a peer, and should, be addressed properly.
your servant,
Cumhail
Arval d'Espas Nord
Greetings from Arval! Robin Gilwell replied to me.
> The word "title" does not mean either "term assigned by the BoD" nor "any
> word placed before a name". The truth, unsurprisingly, is more
> complicated than that.
Agreed.
> If the king asks his kingdom to call all members of a certain order
> "Snugglebunny [Name]", he is establishing a custom for that order. If he
> then states that anyone of equal rank may call themselves so, and nobody
> else can do so, then he is making a title.
But here I don't agree. If the king gives it to you and you stick it in
front of your name, it's a title. (That's not a necessary condition, but
it is sufficient.)
> For instance, I cannot insist that I be announced as "Centurion Robin" in
> a foreign court.
Nor can you insist on being announced as "Don Robin", but that is certainly
a title.
> Another difference is that the king can take it away tomorrow.
That's true of "Baron", at least for court barons. So this is not a
defining difference between titles and other styles. But in all these
cases -- Baron, Master, Don, Centurion -- the king gave you the title,
making it an official usage. That's the key distinction.
Dorothy J Heydt
>
>Apropos of the discussion of titles between me and Arval elsewhere in this
>thread: From the Ansteorran perspective, this is treating "Master" as if it is
>*not* a title, but merely as a customary mode of address to be used in certain
>circumstances. If "Master" is a title, then I can always use it.
Well, yes. If you are (say) a Laurel, you can always use
"Master" to refer to yourself, if you wish to use such a
low-class burgher handle and pretend it is a title of nobility.
I gave that up years ago.
However, in Caid and the West, whatever titles you use for
yourself, only the titles you won on the field will be used on
the field by the herald.
Caid and the
>West, obviously, disagree with this perspective.
Part of it may be that we have a fair number of multiple peers.
I was reading over the transcription of an All-Peers' Meeting
held in the West in 1990, and the transcriber had carefully
introduced each speaker with his/her full set of titles, e.g.,
"Viscountess Sir Mistress of the Laurel, Mistress of the
Pelican, Baroness Hilary of Serendip,"
or
"Count Viscount Sir Master of the Laurel, Master of the Pelican,
Baron William the Lucky," [to which several voices added "Duke
Puffincliff]".
If we used all the available titles in the lists they would take
much longer than they do already, and we would have to go to ten
fields and more lanterns on the field in the final rounds of
what Randall of Hightower used to call "the long day's tourney
into night."
Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin Dorothy J. Heydt
Mists/Mists/West Albany, California
PRO DEO ET REGE djh...@kithrup.com
David hughes
>
>
> > The word "title" does not mean either "term assigned by the BoD" nor "any
> > word placed before a name". The truth, unsurprisingly, is more
> > complicated than that.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > If the king asks his kingdom to call all members of a certain order
> > "Snugglebunny [Name]", he is establishing a custom for that order. If he
> > then states that anyone of equal rank may call themselves so, and nobody
> > else can do so, then he is making a title.
>
> But here I don't agree. If the king gives it to you and you stick it in
> front of your name, it's a title. (That's not a necessary condition, but
> it is sufficient.)
>
> > For instance, I cannot insist that I be announced as "Centurion Robin" in
> > a foreign court.
>
> Nor can you insist on being announced as "Don Robin", but that is certainly
> a title.
>
I can't speak for Robin, shy, retiring man that he is, but I can most
certainly insist on being announced as "Don David". After all, I am
male, possess an AOA, and the term "Don" is listed as an acceptable
variant of "Lord". I cannot, however, object if someone who does not
possess a WSA or equivalent insists on the same usage.
By that arguement, "Don" is a form of address, not a title.
David Gallowglass
Bryan J. Maloney
wrote:
> However, in Caid and the West, whatever titles you use for
> yourself, only the titles you won on the field will be used on
> the field by the herald.
Of course, and this is because, even though the Orders within the Peerage
are equal, one is more equal than the others.
Dorothy J Heydt
Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>
>However, in Caid and the West, whatever titles you use for
>yourself, only the titles you won on the field will be used on
>the field by the herald.
Ooops! Obviously, there are circumstances under which you will
get called "Master" on the field. We only have one such person
fighting in the West at present, Frederick of Holland. We don't
make a whole lot of MoAs in the West; Gwenllian Rhiannon was the
most recent, but she has now gone back to the East. In Caid,
I don't believe there are any, unless some have moved in from
elsewhere.
Dorothy J Heydt
Bryan J. Maloney <bj...@cornell.edu> wrote:
>
>This is, of course, because the three Orders of the "Peerage" in the SCA
Well, that's a period practice at least. Indeed, we already lean
further away from period practice than we might, in trying to
claim that awards given for arts or paper-pushing are "Peerages"
or "the equivalent of Knights" (which is of course not the same
thing). We would do better, from the point of view of adherence
to medieval custom, to forget about Laurels and Pelicans
altogether. We would have done better not to have created them
in the first place, but it's too late now.
Jay Rudin
> > From the Ansteorran perspective, this is treating "Master" as
> > if it is *not* a title, but merely as a customary mode of
> > address to be used in certain circumstances. If "Master" is a
> >title, then I can always use it.
>
> Well, yes. If you are (say) a Laurel, you can always use
> "Master" to refer to yourself, if you wish to use such a
> low-class burgher handle and pretend it is a title of nobility.
> I gave that up years ago.
A cute red herring that misses the point. If you wish to use titles with their
period meaning instead of their SCA one, I'm agreeable. All that changes is which
example I use. The title "Baron", being a peerage, is significantly higher than
knighthood, so let's use that to get back to the point with:
From the Ansteorran perspective, this is treating "Baron" as if it is *not* a title,
but merely as a customary mode of address to be used in certain circumstances. If
"Baron" is a title, then I can always use it.
> However, in Caid and the West, whatever titles you use for
> yourself, only the titles you won on the field will be used on
> the field by the herald.
Sigh. OK: If "Baron" is a title, then I can always expect the heralds to accept it
and use it.
> >Caid and the West, obviously, disagree with this perspective.
>
> Part of it may be that we have a fair number of multiple peers.
> I was reading over the transcription of an All-Peers' Meeting
> held in the West in 1990, and the transcriber had carefully
> introduced each speaker with his/her full set of titles, e.g.,
>
> "Viscountess Sir Mistress of the Laurel, Mistress of the
> Pelican, Baroness Hilary of Serendip,"
>
> or
>
> "Count Viscount Sir Master of the Laurel, Master of the Pelican,
> Baron William the Lucky," [to which several voices added "Duke
> Puffincliff]".
>
> If we used all the available titles in the lists they would take
> much longer than they do already, and we would have to go to ten
> fields and more lanterns on the field in the final rounds of
> what Randall of Hightower used to call "the long day's tourney
> into night."
Again, this has nothing to do with it. Everybody has a fair number of multiple
peers. Last month when four new peerage elevations were announced at Elfsea
Defender, three of them were already peers. When Duke Master Master Sir Don Sigmund
the Wingfooted meets Count Viscount Master Sir Don Baron Simonn of Amber Isle, the
herald announces: "Will Duke Inman MacMoore and Count Simonn of Amber Isle take the
field."
Reducing each person to using a single title fixes the concern that using titles
takes too long; reducing certain people to using none has no particular advantages.
The issue is not that the West and Caid decided that using all the titles takes too
long; it's that they decided that some titles don't matter on the field. Well, they
are certainly free to decide that, and I am free to disagree. One can make a case
either way. But I don't believe it was a time-saving measure. Did they announce
all titles for a while and then stop using some of them to save time?
[Actually, I suspect this custom is merely an accident of history, given that the
West's tourney field pre-dates all non-fighting titles.]
Cynthia Virtue
> >This is, of course, because the three Orders of the "Peerage" in the SCA
> >are equal, but one is more equal than the others.
>
> Well, that's a period practice at least.
I must respectfully disagree with you, m'lady.
As I see it, and has been discussed on the Rialto before, the three orders of
high merit are and represent:
Knight (or Master at Arms) -- knights during the main Middle ages in Europe
were folks just barely noble enough to have a horse and armor. Soldiers, not
commanders, not much power. It's not particularly noble of itself; is only
grand and written about in the sagas if the holder does something astonishing,
or has other noble titles (see below).
Laurel -- nonesuch item in period, but could be considered equivalent to a
Guildmaster. Not noble, but respected. Had a moderate amount of power.
Pelican -- nonesuch, but could be equivalent to high-placed functionaries,
bureaucrats, etc, in a Court. Not noble, but respected. Had a moderate
amount of power.
And then we have our "real" nobles; King, Queen, Prince/ss, Duke, Dutchess,
Vicount/ess, Baron/ess, and so forth. Only folks with significant land and
pedigree were really noble. Under this model we also recognize former holders
of land, since we envision (however vaguely) new landed office-holders more as
the direct bodily heirs of the former incumbent, in a type of familial system.
So if we're going to recognize some titles as being more equal than others,
and also be more true to period practice, we should only recognize the landed
noble titles.
--
Lady Cynthia du Pre Argent, Minister of Silly Hats, Crosston
=-=-=
"Such virtue hath my pen...." -Shakespeare, Sonnet LXXXI
"I knew this wasn't _my_ pen!" --Cynthia Virtue
Barbara Nostrand
It seems to me that it would be a bit more complicated, and depend
upon the specific organization of the military units involved. There
are pretty good books about military history available. It seems to
me that one could go through these and find several different
military rank systems in use. Suppose you have a pike company.
Someone commands the pike company. That person is most likely not
going to be busy serving in the light or heavy cavalry squadrons.
He may still sit on a horse and wear armour, but he is busy seeing
to his own troops.
Your Humble Servant
Solveig Throndardottir
Amateur Scholar
Phil Anderson
>When I lived in Fair Caid 5 years ago, tournaments were commonly heralded at
>each combat. The tradition is that only honors won on the field are announced.
Not in this corner of Caid! We first heard about this custom a few
months back and the general (possibly unanimous) reaction in Southron
Gaard is that it's grossly insulting to those whose titles are junked
on the field.
I don't have a copy of Corpora to hand, but doesn't it require that
no peerage be given precedence over another?
Edward Long-hair
Southron Gaard, Caid
--
----------------------------------------------
Phil Anderson *** ha...@sloth.southern.co.nz
----------------------------------------------
"No-one is equal to anyone else!"
Steve
> The tradition is that only honors won on the field are
> announced. That is, Master of the Laurel Bob would be announced as "Bob";
> Mistress of the Pelican Jane would be announced as "Jane"; members of the
> Chivalry -Sir Fred, for instance, would be announced as "Sir Fred".
> Tiltles won in combat (Counts. Viscounts, Dukes,etc) are announced, but
> other awards are not.
So if someone has the rank of Viscount because their Lady won a
principality coronet tourney, would they be announced as such in the
lists? I refuse to announce our local Landed Baron as just "Sigurd"
because he happens to have no fighting awards. Of course, should he
himself ask me not to, I would comply, but until the Crown tells me
otherwise personally, I'll leave it in Sigurds hands. (Of course, I
might well get that chance this weekend. Ivan's in town...)
> Thanks for the valuable input and all that milord Arval, but thats the way it
> is in Caid.
Not in this part of Caid. It is local custom that any titles may be used
(at the owners discretion) and as we all know, custom has the force of
law. Until the heralds minutes mentioned that tradition was against it
we had never considered otherwise. The wording was something like
"according to tradition" so I feel reasonably safe keeping to our
traditions.
> Rather presumptuous, I think, to say someone else's tradition is a "bad" one,
> when the innocent answer to a straightforward question about different
> kingdom's traditions is put forth.
As a Caiden, I happen to think it is an unwise tradition for much the
same reasons as Arval has expressed, but then, his conclusions that it
reinforces a perception of knights as more important than other peers is
also in line with my observations (distanced as they are by an Ocean) of
Caid.
Ulf
William Underhill
>
>
> "Sargeant" was a military title, of course, but "forester" was a job
> description, not a personal rank. Since neither implies rank historically,
> either one is available to anyone in the Society under Corpora VII.C.4
> it is effectively creating a title of rank. The Board reserves that
> authority to itself.
It is, of course, possible that the kingdom in question (Middle, I think
it was?) did petition the BoD to create the title for them...
Yours aye,
Uilleam mac Alan vic Hamish, called the Mariner
--
.---------------------------------------------------------------------.
| William Underhill tr...@geocities.com |
| Speaker-to-Electrons http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6650 |
| Uilleam mac Alan vic Hamish IC Q#20433054 |
| The usual federal government employee disclaimer, blah blah blah... |
`-------------------------| Ready Aye Ready |-------------------------'
William Underhill
> knight/pelican up to his elbows in dishwater is still a knight. A
> laurel in a helmet is still a peer, and should, be addressed properly.
>
Subject, of course, to that gentle's personal preference. I mind me of a
couple of peers whose preference, on all occasions except Royal Court,
is the use of their name. No alphabet soup, no titles.
I prefer this myself, unless I have to make an official pronouncement of
some sort, and then I use only the title relevant to the business at
hand.
Yours aye,
Uilleam mac Alan vic Hamish, called the Mariner
(not a Peer)
nic...@my-dejanews.com
In article <F1x3J...@kithrup.com>,
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
> However, in Caid and the West, whatever titles you use for
> yourself, only the titles you won on the field will be used on
> the field by the herald.
So if I managed to authorize and come out and fight at a tourney in the West,
I wouldn't even be "Lady"? A territorial baron wouldn't be a "Baron?"
> Part of it may be that we have a fair number of multiple peers.
In my part of the world, we usually default to the highest title to which a
person is entitled (although you still have "Duke Sir....s). The Kingdom
seneschal of Ealdormere is usually simply Viscountess Moria, even though she
is a Pelican and a Court Baroness as well. I would say a gentler version of
the Western practice would be to allow combattants to use the highest title
to which they are entitled, but any other announced honours should have been
earned on the field.
However, in the end, it probably doesn't matter much--I would imagine that in
the West, as in Ealdormere, most of the fighters know each other, and it
really wouldn't matter all that much what titles were used. (If I wanted
other fighters to know I was a Laurel, I'd stick a big honkin' Laurel wreath
on my helm or surcote :-)
Nicolaa de Bracton
--
Visit the Library of St. Nicholas:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/5145
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Bryan J. Maloney
wrote:
> further away from period practice than we might, in trying to
> claim that awards given for arts or paper-pushing are "Peerages"
> or "the equivalent of Knights" (which is of course not the same
Actually, what kinds of awards would be handed out for paper pushing or
arts? Lots of money. Political power. Actual bona fide knighthood...
hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu
: Greetings from Arval! Robin Gilwell replied to me.
: > For instance, I cannot insist that I be announced as "Centurion Robin" in
: > a foreign court.
: Nor can you insist on being announced as "Don Robin", but that is certainly
: a title.
Sure he can -- given that Robin is the holder of an AoA rank (never mind
the higher) and "Don" is an officially sanctioned alternate title for that
rank. (I know what you meant, it just happened to be a bad example.)
Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glsavryn
hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu
: >West, obviously, disagree with this perspective.
: Part of it may be that we have a fair number of multiple peers.
: I was reading over the transcription of an All-Peers' Meeting
: held in the West in 1990, and the transcriber had carefully
: introduced each speaker with his/her full set of titles, e.g.,
: "Viscountess Sir Mistress of the Laurel, Mistress of the
: Pelican, Baroness Hilary of Serendip,"
Not a good example, Dorothea. At that particular meeting, because the
procedings were being taped and transcribed for dissemination to Peers who
could not attend for reasons of distance, people were specifically
_requested_ to introduce themselves with their full titles.
Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn
Dorothy J Heydt
>arts? Lots of money. Political power. Actual bona fide knighthood...
Hmmm, you must be working out of a later period than I am. Yes,
you could get money for doing arts. Particularly if you were a
goldsmith---but then you'd spend most of it on materials. Yes,
you could get political power of the behind-the-scenes type for
pushing papers: not a title. Not till late in our period, like
maybe Tudors. I can see Henry VII giving a baronage to somebody
who'd been really sneaky and squeezed a lot of land/money out of
his fellow subjects for the King's benefit. I can see Elizabeth
I knighting a painter who'd made her look twenty instead of sixty,
or an accomplished dancer with cute legs. But this is late,
late, late. I live in the ninth century, where what you'd get
for arts or paperwork is mostly room and board.
Zebee Johnstone
>Bryan J. Maloney <bj...@cornell.edu> wrote:
>who'd been really sneaky and squeezed a lot of land/money out of
>his fellow subjects for the King's benefit. I can see Elizabeth
>I knighting a painter who'd made her look twenty instead of sixty,
>or an accomplished dancer with cute legs. But this is late,
>late, late. I live in the ninth century, where what you'd get
>for arts or paperwork is mostly room and board.
Umm.. you didn't get knights at all in the 9thC. What you got for
fighting was room and board, that's what the cyng gave his hird.
Knightings for non-martial things are documented back at least as
far as early 1100s, and were quite common by 1300s. (300 years before
the death of Elizabeth.)
Dunno if Stefan's files have the many quotes that have been presented
about this, but might be worth a look.
Hrolf Herjolfssen says he has a quote from the Master of the Bodlian
Library to the effect thats research in manuscript sources show that in
England in the 1300s less than 10% of knights were capable of serving in
the King's forces. The others were either too old or else were knights
because of position - King's Justice, etc - or income. 40 pounds a year
is the sum given in Henry II's proclamation that required all those with
income above this to be knighted.
In Florence in the mid 1300s, an ordnance was passed forbidding
dead people to be knighted. A French king knighted an architect.
There were women in the Order of the Garter.
A quick hunt through deja news might be instructive....
Silfren
- the source of the Florentine ordinance and the architect being
knighted is "Longman History of Europe - The High Middle Ages"
- the source of the women in the Order of the Garter is the recent
"female knights" threads.
McLean1382
In article <F1x3J...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
writes:
>If we used all the available titles in the lists they would take
>much longer than they do already, and we would have to go to ten
>fields and more lanterns on the field in the final rounds of
>what Randall of Hightower used to call "the long day's tourney
>into night."
>
Feh. I prefer the medieval practice of using fewer titles if you're really
important. After all, if you're *really* important, everyone will know who you
are already.
So Lord Scales, one of the most powerful men in 15th c. England, shows up at
this tournament, and announces himself with "I am Scales, and I have come to
perform my enterprise...."
Galleron
McLean1382
In article <F1x9A...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
writes:
>Well, that's a period practice at least. Indeed, we already lean
>further away from period practice than we might, in trying to
>claim that awards given for arts or paper-pushing are "Peerages"
>or "the equivalent of Knights" (which is of course not the same
>thing). We would do better, from the point of view of adherence
>to medieval custom, to forget about Laurels and Pelicans
>altogether.
But the medieval mind had no trouble with the the concept that a knight,
cathedral prior, dean, Master of the Rolls, mayor of Calais, doctor of
divinity, and prothonotary could be equal in rank and dignity, and in that
sense, peers with a small "p".
Of course, *none* of them would be Peers. But a paper-pushing Bishop would be.
Galleron
Dorothy J Heydt
<hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>Not a good example, Dorothea. At that particular meeting, because the
>procedings were being taped and transcribed for dissemination to Peers who
>could not attend for reasons of distance, people were specifically
>_requested_ to introduce themselves with their full titles.
They may have been requested to do so, but they didn't. (You
were not at that meeting, being drawn elsewhere on a business
trip, though you sent a long and illuminating letter.) In fact,
the speakers would say, "This is Flieg," or "Hilary speaking, or
even more often get three sentences into their peroration and
interject "Oh, sorry, this is So-and-So."
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
Dorothy J Heydt
Cynthia Virtue <cvi...@ricochet.net> wrote:
>As I see it, and has been discussed on the Rialto before, the three orders of
>high merit are and represent:
>
>Knight (or Master at Arms) -- knights during the main Middle ages in Europe
>Laurel -- nonesuch item in period... Not noble, but respected.
>Pelican -- nonesuch... Not noble, but respected.
(I could ask "respected by whom?" Mostly, I suspect, by those
who were even further away from nobility than they were.)
>And then we have our "real" nobles; King, Queen, Prince/ss, Duke, Duchess,
>Vicount/ess, Baron/ess, and so forth. Only folk with significant land and
>pedigree were really noble.....
I believe you've just summarized what I was saying. The real
nobility are the ones with medieval titles, most of which are
acquired by being, or having been, Royalty. The exceptions are
the Baron[esse]s, who are or have been Landed Barons or have
achieved the favor of the King.
Knights are noble, but just barely. Laurels/Pelicans are
neither noble nor period.
>So if we're going to recognize some titles as being more equal than others,
>and also be more true to period practice, we should only recognize the landed
>noble titles.
This makes perfect sense.