[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

Re: Justin's Peerage appearances

Poster: James and/or Nancy Gilly <KatieMorag@worldnet.att.net>

>To: sca-east@world.std.com
>From: nostrand@pi.math.wsu.edu (Barbara Nostrand)
>Sender: sca-east-approval@world.std.com
>Reply-To: sca-east@world.std.com
>Subject: Re: Justin's Peerage appearances
>X-Authentication-Warning: europe.std.com: daemon set sender to
sca-east-approval using -f
>Date: Wed, 20 Nov 96 04:08:09 +0000
>-Poster: nostrand@pi.math.wsu.edu (Barbara Nostrand)
>Noble Cousins!
>Lord Cadell wrote in response to Master Justin:
>>> I still don't like the title much; for some reason, "Marquis" doesn't
ring my
>>bells at all.
>>Oh?  Due to the the silly sound ("Yoo-hoo!  Oh, Markie!"), or that it is
>>inapporpriate based on British hierarchy (Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount,
>>Baron) that an SCA Peerage title implies precedence over the many retired
>>Crowns, or do bad visions associate with the term of rank in general (probably
>>due to a rank performance of Marat/deSade, the full title of which is
worthy of
>>its own subject post in some other appropriate email list).
>1) Whatever title might be chosen will feel "odd" at first, but will be a
>   sacred tradition and feel "right" in about three years.
>2) The SCA order of precedence does not need to correspond to the modern
>   British order of precedence.  It should not invert the order putting the
>   king at the bottom, but exact matching is not all that important.  Further,
>   real status rarely conforms to the Order of Precedence anyway.  Further,
>   real status in the historical middle ages was not directly linked to
>   specific titles either.  A county might easily be worth more than a
>   kingdom in the Middle Ages.
>3) In my opinion, one of the key elements in this proposal is that it would not
>   actually require that the kingdoms grant naked patents.  It would simply
>   them the perogative to do so and would make available a title of nobility
>   (currently lacking) to the non-royal peers.  This title of nobility is
>   an important part of making possible the naked grants.  Otherwise, there
>   would be no title by which to call these people.  (Yes, I know they could
>   possibly be called "master" and "mistriss" which on the one hand everyone
>   knows is not a title of nobility and which is over-used in the society as
>   it is applied to dance masters, master chiurgeons, etc.)  Further, without
>   the title, there would be no token of estate.  A token and title of peerage
>   simple could (in my opinion) help emphasise the peerage itself.
>                                                        Your Humble Servant
>                                                        Solveig Throndardottir
>                                                        Amateur Scholar
>| Barbara Nostrand, Ph.D.               | Solveig Throndardottir, CoM    |
>| Dept. of Pure & Applied Mathematics   | Amateur Scholar                |
>| Washington State University           | Medieval Japanese Research     |
>| Pullman, Washington  99164-3113       | Carolingia Status Mentis Est   |
>| (509) 335-5110                        |                                |
>| nostrand@pi.math.wsu.edu              | bnostran@lynx.neu.edu          |
> _________________________________________________________________
> To leave this mailing list, send mail to majordomo@world.std.com
> with the message UNSUBSCRIBE SCA-EAST

James and Nancy Gilly

Dogs have Masters.  Cats have staff.

List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org