Page 1 of 1
Noble Titles Act
Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:04 pm
by CJ Miller
Be it enacted by the Landsraad of the Imperial Republic of Shireroth that the Lawbook, Chapter III.C, be amended as follows:
from
1. Lands
a. Titles may have lands associated with them, held in fief.
b. These lands will pass with the title, to an heir, if the title itself can be inherited.
2. Duke
a. Duke is a title that holds the rank of Patrician and can be passed to a designated heir.
3. Margrave
a. Margrave is a title that holds the rank of Patrician but cannot be passed to a designated heir.
4. Baron
a. Baron is a title that holds the rank of Equestrian and can be passed to a designated heir.
5. Thane
a. Thane is a title that holds the rank of Equestrian but cannot be passed to a designated heir.
6. Count
a. Count is a title that holds the rank of Civitas and can be passed to a designated heir.
7. Jarl
a. A Jarl is a title that holds the rank of Civitas but cannot be passed to a designated heir.
to
1. Lands
a. Titles may have lands associated with them, held in fief.
b. These lands will pass with the title, to an heir, if the title itself can be inherited.
2. Patrician Titles
a. A noble of the Patrician rank whose title can be passed to a designated heir shall be known as a Duke.
b. A noble of the Patrician rank whose title cannot be passed to a designated heir shall be known as a Duke-Palatine.
3. Equestrian Titles
a. A noble of the Equestrian rank whose title can be passed to a designated heir shall be known as an Earl.
b. A noble of the Equestrian rank whose title cannot be passed to a designated heir shall be known as a Earl-Palatine.
4. Civitas Titles
a. A noble of the Civitas rank whose title can be passed to a designated heir shall be known as a Baron.
b. A noble of the Civitas rank whose title cannot be passed to a designated heir shall be known as a Baron-Palatine.
Discuss.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:52 pm
by Shyriath
Concerning this, and continuing the discussion from the
Landsraad version:
Maybe we should ask more openly about something other then palatine...? I'm sure there is a language somewhere with something better.
The problem here, I think, is that in the European systems of nobility that we're basing our titles off of, non-hereditary titles of this kind are not historically all that common. In Britain there are the life peers, but those are a relatively recent phenomenon, and in any case there's nothing in their titles to say whether they're hereditary or not (though I don't think there are life peerages above the rank of Baron); unless you know the background behind a specific title, a Baron could be a life peer or a hereditary peer. In most other contexts, non-hereditary titles are going to be special cases: received by virtue of holding some important post, or given as a courtesy title to a member of/heir to a royal family, rather than as its own common subclass of nobility.
In short, I don't think there's an easy answer to the terminology here. "Palatine" doesn't really have that meaning of "nonhereditary", as far as I can tell, but there's not a whole lot that does. My own preference would be to stick "Hereditary" in front of the requisite hereditary titles, because it's pretty clear what it means, even if it lacks glamour.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:03 pm
by Malliki Tosha
It doesn't, but if there is any title that needs to be separated, it's the non-hereditary ones.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:10 pm
by Kaiser Ikol II
So, everyone likes Duke and Baron, but Malliki doesn't like Thane and I don't like Earl. We need a title to stick in there (and don't say marquis, it makes me think of <marquee> and I hated that tag). Suggestions welcome (and if anyone has a better word than "Palatine", that'd be cool too.)
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:19 pm
by Andreas the Wise
I also dislike Earl, and want Baron to stay as the middle level.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:30 pm
by Kaiser Ikol II
Problem with Baron as the middle level is that there aren't too many noble ranks below baron. I think the only ones are baronet and knight, although you could count some of the more olde english ones like thane and reeve.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:44 pm
by Shyriath
Pretty much correct. Mind you, I wouldn't mind being Sir Shyriath, the Knight of Sunderspray...
Otherwise, there's not many European-style titles that aren't extremely German. Burgrave, if you accepted it, might possibly go underneath Baron. Landgrave and Margrave would go between Duke and Baron. Then there's Grand Duke or Prince, but I don't think we want to see a lot of them floating around...
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:48 pm
by Erik Mortis
Jarl instead of Earl...?
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 7:01 pm
by Malliki Tosha
And there we go mixing names again. Jarl is the same as Earl.
The reason I put Baron as the bottom level title is because it is IRL. It's Duke-Marquess-Earl-Viscount-Baron in Britain and the order is the same everywhere. It was a mistake from the beginning and should be corrected. Count is at the same level as Earl, which is why the title directly below is Viscount and also why the wife of an Earl is called a Countess.
One of Scott's points was to make this as intuitive and easy as possible, and to throw stuff like Jarl, Margrave, Thane, Reeve and whatever else there is into this does not make an easy system.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 7:09 pm
by Erik Mortis
Why don't we just steal the english system outright? Would that solve your problems?>
Honestly, I have no issue taking whatever names we like, in whatever order we like. We aren't Europe, we aren't England. We're a micronation, stealing and misusing is what we do best.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:32 pm
by Malliki Tosha
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:56 pm
by Malliki Tosha
So, we have three levels of titles. The given one is Duke for top, the question is what to put in the two other levels. So, please list:
Duke
2. ?
3. ?
Submit your preference.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 8:57 pm
by Malliki Tosha
Malliki Tosha wrote:Duke
2. Earl
3. Baron
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:12 am
by Andreas the Wise
Malliki Tosha wrote:
Duke
2. Baron
3. Thane was fine. Not Earl and not Count, for preference, but don't mind too much beyond that.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 3:59 am
by Kaiser Ikol II
I'll add "Castellan" to the list.
Okay, so, way I see it, our only choices are Earl, Thane, and a few minor ones like "Burgrave" and "Castellan".
Malliki, if you vote yes on a bill, it'll pass, so we're going after your vote here. Can we hold a poll to determine whether people in support of this proposal prefer Earl, Thane, or one of the others, and count on your vote even if it's Thane or one of the ones you don't like?
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:52 am
by Falkner van der Sluijs
I still don't understand the problem here. The titles are fine as they are. Fuck real-world standards, this is the goddamn internet.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 7:29 am
by Erik Mortis
Amen brother!
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:07 am
by CJ Miller
Malliki Tosha wrote:Malliki Tosha wrote:Duke
2. Earl
3. Baron
This
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:57 am
by Malliki Tosha
If it's so tight that it comes down to my vote, I'd rather go for status quo.
Let's keep it like it is until there is a clear majority to change.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:00 am
by Kaiser Ikol II
Why? It's not like the current system is a Shirerithian tradition. It was formed something like two months ago, on the spur of the moment, and when I suggested it be fixed before being put to a vote people told me not to bother because it was "only temporary".
I think there's a majority for this (Shyriath seems to support it, but he didn't vote last time, and the same might be true for Daniel) but only if we can actually get people to do it.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Tue Jun 29, 2010 11:04 am
by Malliki Tosha
Because I say so. It's my vote. Get me something a clear majority supports, and I'll do the same. I tried and people didn't like my suggestion.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 9:20 am
by Kaiser Ikol II
Well, Andreas and I both prefer Thane to Earl, and you're not going to vote yes on this no matter what, so I'm just going to do Thane instead of Earl and hope Daniel remembers to cast his vote this time.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 9:30 am
by Malliki Tosha
Whatever.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 9:39 am
by Daniel Farewell
I'm sorry I didn't vote then; it was the Swedish midsummer festivities so I was in the countryside all weekend.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 9:57 am
by Shyriath
I have to fight a tendency to refrain from voting on my own bills, I think. It seems showy.
Partly, though, it's because I have trouble deciding where I actually stand on this. I can live quite happily with the status quo; I can live quite happily with a different system. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages, but we'll be the same effective rank either way.
On balance, I'd probably vote in favor, because I have no particular reason to oppose.
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 10:30 am
by Kaiser Ikol II
Okay, re-proposed (thanks for the heads-up about the archives, Daniel).
Re: Noble Titles Act
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:13 pm
by Erik Mortis
I should try this trick more often.. if something fails.. just keep putting it forth until it passes...
