[Ansteorra] Why aren't we doing this?
rbculver at sbcglobal.net
Fri Nov 5 22:35:34 PDT 2010
Closer to correct for which period? In Early Germanic, certainly Anglo-Saxon,
lored and thegn were not titles in the first place but statements of
relationship. In fact the same person could be considered both at the same
time- lord over one set of people and a thegn to another group or individual.
The only real titles at that time were functional, not necessarily rank, though
it changes in ecclesiastical circles. Bretwalda, alderman, cyning, dryhten, and
such were leadership titles. It is much later that Thegn become an
administrative title somewhat equivalent to baron or sheriff. At this point in
time cniht still meant boy.
Of course if we truly want to move to accurate, our kingdom name is missing an
element to make it correct to Anglo-Saxon naming practice. :P
From: "Kevinkeary at aol.com" <Kevinkeary at aol.com>
To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
Sent: Fri, November 5, 2010 9:47:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Why aren't we doing this?
It would actually be moved considerably closer to correct if we just
acknowledged the fact that an 'Award of Arms' -- the right to inheritable
-- raises you to the Gentry, makes you a Gentleman or Gentlewoman, as
opposed to the Yeomanry or Peasantry, and the titles Lord and Lady should be
reserved to the Nobility -- landed Baronys and higher. Baronets are
post-period, but Court Baronys are a close approximation, and Baronets are also
Given that, the approximation would actually be fairly close.
More information about the Ansteorra