Re: Displaying heraldry

[vnend%nudity@Princeton.EDU (David W. James)]

Poster: vnend%nudity@Princeton.EDU (David W. James)

> Poster: vnend%nudity@Princeton.EDU (David W. James)

> > Poster: Beth Morris <bmorris@access.digex.net>
> 
> > True enough.  And Lords outranked Knights, and Master/Mistress was a
> > term for commoners.  
> 
> > Keilyn

> 	This is a case of over-broad reactionism.  As we will see below, the
> use of 'master' to refer to nobility, knights and people both Learned
> Teachers (directly relatable to our Laurels) and to functionaries of the
> crown or other nobles (our Pelicans) is historically, and, more
> specifically, medievally correct.

	A couple of helpful souls have pointed out an unfortunate turn of
phrase here.  I forgot that 'reactionism' is too close to 'reactionary',
which some take as a slight.  No such thing was intended.  What I meant
to say was that the reaction that 'master/mistress' as a title for
Laurels and Pelicans is inappropriate because it 'was a term for
commoners' is only partly correct.  It was also a title/term for
knights, nobility, officers of the Court, and respected instructors, and
so is perfectly appropriate for use for members of all three peerages.

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