GoR: who has 'em in the RoP & why
Deborah Sweet
dssweet at okway.okstate.edu
Mon Oct 2 12:00:27 PDT 1995
>>I said:
>>Awards with GoA: 1) There are simple Grants of Arms
>> 2) Iris of Merit
>> 3) Star of Merit
>> 4) White Scarf
>> 5) Centurion
>> 6) Court Barony
>> 7) Landed Baron/ess (who don't have one of the above
>> awards)
>>
>>However, if a person receives a barony (court or landed) before
>>receiving any of the 2-5 awards, should there not also be a GoR listing
>>as well?
>doesn't matter - they would be listed as receiving the l/c barony and then
>the 2-5 and still no independent GoR/A.
>All the awards you listed carry GoAs, it is implied in the award and
>the GoA should not be listed seperately. Very occasionally the Crown
>in our kingdom will award a simple GoA or GoR these will be listed
>separately.
>FYI Landed Barons/esses will be listed as receiving such and then if
>the crown desires receive a Court Barony when they step down. Their
>Court Barony rank dates to the day they were awarded the Landed Barony.
>Lorraine DeerSlayer
To be clearer on my question, here's two different entries from the Roll
of Precedence, showing only their Grant level awards.
Anne Louise of Bluecastle - Barony 07/31/82 the Steppes
GoR 01/07/84
Bjorn Magnusson Esping - Barony 10/20/79 Baron Namron
CSM 11/18/79
CIM 10/09/82
GoR 10/20/79
The first one shows someone receiving a Grant two years after becoming a
landed baroness. The second one shows someone receiving a barony and a
grant on the same date. I could list *many* more examples of both of
these two circumstances.
So why? Is it a case of "ohmighod, the scroll didn't *say* grant, so we
better award them a GoR"? Or, is it a case of poor research? Or is it a
case of the belief that *both* the barony *and* the grant had to be
recorded in the roll of precedence?
Estrill
More information about the Ansteorra
mailing list