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

[Bill Butler]

I have to agree with Star and I would use the Ansteorran Order of Presidence as that example of why.  In the OP, March order is Majesties, Highnesses, Nobility, Peers, Grants, etc, and then by cronological orderof award grant within their "group".

In Ansteorra, the Baronies, with their Nobility, are considered the highest "independent" group. Due to the requirements to become a group, you have Provinces, then Shires.  Cantons and then Colleges are under the "protection" of Baronies, so they fall in the end of the line.  This gives us a "de facto" OP for the groups

William


--- On Fri, 11/6/09, Alasdair MacEogan <alasdair at bmhanson.net> wrote:

> From: Alasdair MacEogan <alasdair at bmhanson.net>
> Subject: Re: [ANSTHRLD] Kingdom Law and Groups (was Re: Chronological list of groups)
> To: "Heralds List, Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <heralds at lists.ansteorra.org>
> Date: Friday, November 6, 2009, 10:27 PM
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/heralds-ansteorra.org
>