[ANSTHRLD] Kingdom Law and Groups (was Re: Chronological list of groups)

[Alasdair MacEogan]

Star Principal Herald <star at ansteorra.org> wrote:

>  My personal opinion is that provinces should always march behind
>  baronies, as even the newest hypothetical barony would have ceremonial
>  nobility. This is conflating precedence of individuals with
>  theoretical precedence of groups as a whole, certainly, but seems a
>  politic compromise.

In this instance, and as NOT a member of the aforesaid populace, I happen to disagree with you.  I feel in a march of GROUPS, that provinces should be co-mingled with groups.  Of course I also believe that branches that are "under the protection of" another (for lack of better terminology here) should march with the parent group.  This includes cantons as well as the institutional branches that are formed under and report through a barony.  

Remember that even though provinces have  no ceremonial head, they actually have a requirement for more members and are really laid out in kingdom law to be harder to achieve the status of than a barony.  Otherwise as you said we are "conflating precedence of individuals with theoretical precedence of groups".

In the end though as Francois stated at the beginning, in this instance we will do as directed by their majesties/highnesses.

Alasdair