[ANSTHRLD] Latin, Old French, and Law-French, oh my!

[tmcd@panix.com]

Diane Rudin <serena1570 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > My guess, based on a quick scan of OED definitions, is that the
> > > first son's title was one rank below his father's.
>
> > Modern practice is that his title is the second-ranking title of his
> > father, but it's just a courtesy -- he's not actually a peer and has
> > none of the privileges.
>
> I=92m not sure whether you are merely adding discussion of modern
> practice to the original discussion of period practice, or adducing
> this fact to rebut my assertion.

I can't rebut period practice with modern practice.  I just wonder
whether whoever originally said "one rank below" might have been
mislead by the fact that someone with an English title usually has one
of each rank below.

> OED (compact), 1971 ed., p. 1730, under "Marquis" defn. 2, in the
> examples: "15.. [meaning exact year unknown, but known to be in the
> 1500's] *Bk. Precedence* in *Q. Eliz. Acad.* (1869) [meaning it's a
> period source known from a Victorian reprint] 13 Item. a Dukes
> Eldest sonn is Borne a Marquesse, and shall goe as a Marquisse."

Thanks for the citation.  Given how many things heraldic treatises got
wrong or invented, though, and how many things modern etiquette books
invent or get arguably wrong, I would wish for a more authoritative
source than a period book of manners.

... and going to heraldica.org, I find it.  It's the Lord
Chamberlain's order of 1520 (as amended in 1595).

    Source: Squibb, op. cit., Appendix I, p. 99-101.

    [The text of the Order survives in its amended form in a copy of a
    paper lent to Richard Lee, Clarenceux King of Arms, on 17 January 1595
    by Lord Treasurer Burghley, one of the Commissioners appointed to
    inquire into the precedence of 'personages of great Estate birth and
    callinge.' A note in the handwriting of Ralph Brooke, York Herald,
    states that he saw Burleigh deliver the paper to Lee (Coll. Arm. MS
    R.36, Hare I, po. 181). The preamble stating the circumstances in
    which the Order was drawn up must have been prepared after 28 January
    1547, since it describes Henry VIII as 'of glorious memory.']

    On Mondaye in the Easter Weeke in the xjth yere of the raigne of King
    Henry the Eyght of glorious memory the Earle of Worcester then beynge
    Chamberlayne to the Kinge, dyned in the Greate Chamber att Richmont in
    his Roome and Mons. de la Batye Ambassador to the ffrenche kinge dyned
    with him sittinge directly on the over syde against the sayde Lord
    Chamberlayne, The Ambassador of Venyce, sittinge next unto the
    L. Chamberlayne on the insyde, The Earle of Westmorland on the over
    syde next to the ffrench Ambassador. The Earle of Ketitt on the insyde
    next to the Ambassador of Venyce. The Earle of Devonshire on the
    owtesyde next unto the Earle of Westmerlande. At whiche tyme order was
    taken for the placynge of Lordes and Ladyes as hereunder is sett
    downe.

    1.-- Firste the Duke to goo after his Creation, and the Duches his
    wyfe to goo after the same.

    2 Item.-- A Dukes eldiste son is borne a Marquis, savinge he shall goo
    beneath all Marquisses, and his wyfe beneath all Marquisses wyves, and
    above all Dukes daughters.

    3 Item.-- Dukes daughters be borne as Marquisses in all degrees,
    savinge they shall goo beneathe all Marquisses and Dukes eldiste sonns
    Wyves. And yf they be married to a Baron, they shall goo after the
    Estate of their housbands. And if they marye with a Knight, or under
    the degree of a Knight, then to go after ther birth.

    4 Item.-- Dukes younger sonns be borne as Earles, and shall goo above
    all Viscounts, and beneath all the eldiste sonns of Marquisses, and
    ther wyves to go accordynge to the same.

    5 Item.-- A Marquis to goo after his Creation and the Marquisses ther
    Wyves to goo after the same.

    6 Item.-- A Marques eldiste soe is borne an Earle and shall goo above
    all Dukes younger sonns and above all Viscounts and their Wyves
    accordinge to the same.

    7 Item.-- All Marquisses daughters to be borne as Countisses and shall
    goo above all Dukes younger sonns Wyves and above all Viscountisses,
    and yf they be maried to a baron they shall goo after ther housbande,
    and yf thay be maried to a Knight, or under the degree of a Knight,
    thay shall goo accordinge to ther byrthe.

    8 Item.-- All Marquisses younger sonns to be borne as Barons and shall
    goo beneath all barons and above all Viscounts eldist sonns, and ther
    Wyves to goo accordinge to the same.

    9 Item.-- An Earle to goo after his Creation and the Countisses their
    Wyves to goo after the same.

    10 Item.-- An Earles eldiste sonne is borne as a Viscounte savinge he
    shall goo beneath all Viscounts and his Wyfe beneath all Viscountisses
    and above all other Earles daughters.

    11 Item. -- Earles daughters are borne as Viscounts savinge thay shall
    goo beneath all Viscountisses and the Earles eldist sonns wyves and yf
    thay be maried to a baron thay shall goo after the degree of ther
    housbande. And yf thay marle with a Knight or under the degree ofa
    Knight thay shall goo after theire birthe.

    12 Item. -- Earles younger sonnes be borne as barons sayinge thay
    shall goo beneath all barons and Viscounts eldiste sonns and above all
    Baronetts [i.e. bannerets] and their Wyves to goo beneath all
    baronesses and Viscounts daughters and above all Baronetts Wyves.

    13 Item. -- A Viscount to goo after his Creation and the Viscountes
    theire wyves after the same.

    14 Item. -- Viscounts eldiste sonns be borne as barons and shall goo
    as Barons savinge thay shall goo beneath all Barons all Marquisses
    younger sonns and above all Earls younger sonns and their wyves shall
    goo beneath all baronnesses and above all Viscounts daughters.

    15 Item.-- Viscounts daughters be borne as Baronesses savinge they
    shall goo beneath all Baronesses and Viscounts eldist sonns wyves, and
    yf they be maried to a Baron thay shall goo after the degree of their
    housbandes and yf they marye a Knighte or under the degree of a
    Knighte thay shall goo after theire byrthes.

    16 Item.-- All Viscounts younger sonns as Baronetts [i.e. bannerets]
    and shall goo as Baneretts savinge thay shall goo beneath all
    Baneretts and theire wyves to goo accordinge to the same.

    17 Item.-- A Baron to goo after his Creation and the Barronesses their
    wyves to go after the same.

    18 Item.-- Barons eldiste sonns be borne as Banerets and shall goo as
    Baneretts savinge they shall goo above all Baronetts [i.e. bannerets]
    and all Barons younger sonns to goo above all Batchler Knights because
    their ffather is a Piere of the Realme.

    19 Item.-- [This was set downe & ordered by the 3 Lo. Comyssioners for
    these purpoises, 1595.] All Barons daughters to goo above all
    Baneretts wyves and Batchler Knightes Wyves [struck thru: so longe as
    thay be unmaryed] and yf thay marie under degree of a Knight thay
    shall then goo [struck thru: beneath] above all Knights wyves
    according to ther Birth and Estate.

    20 Item. -- Yf there be any of the degree above written come of the
    blood Royall or be any kynne to the Kinges highnes thay ought to
    stance above the degrees that they be of themselves, as a Duke above
    all other Dukes and so foorthe all the degrees in lyke sorte unlesse
    the pleasure of the Prince be to the contrarye.

So it looks like period practice might differ from modern practice (if
a lord didn't happen to have a subsidiary title one rung below).
What I wonder about is the exact meaning of "borne": does it include
"to be styled"?  It can't mean "is", because then
    2 Item.-- A Dukes eldiste son is borne a Marquis, savinge he shall goo
    beneath all Marquisses
would make no sense.

> As to your list of examples of persons with titles whose titles
> don't seem at first glance to match their land-holdings, I believe I
> mentioned that nobles had lesser titles and lands, but only used
> their highest title.

That wasn't my point.  I was addressing the assertion that a person's
title came from where his lands were.

> Daniel added more discussion about revolutions, subinfeudation, the
> church, etc.  While his discussion (and any other) could be
> expanded, I don=92t feel the need to continue it on this list.

OK, but I thought I was addressing points you'd raised.

Daniel de Lincolia
--
Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com; tmcd at us.ibm.com is my work address