You are in a situation where a good friend of yours is also your superior in rank, are you using their full title and name or falling back on the use of a familiar name?

I participate in the SCA and find that people go away from titles and fall back on the use of first names instead of their title. My thought is that this is due to our modern sensibilities of equality.

I am wondering if this is an issue with reenacting groups and if so how it is dealt with?

(I apologize for bringing the SCA into this discussion but I am using it as an attempt to clarify my question)

--------------------

I will be the first to admit that for all of our sucesses with other forms of reenactment, The Red Co. is really, really bad about forms of address. Everyone from the soldiers to the little kids address Jeff and me as "Hey Gwen", and "Hey Tristan". I have no idea what rank "Hey" is, but man, we're *it*.

The single exception to this was Genot, AM's friend, who steadfastly addressed me as "Madam" the entire week of our last event. The first couple of times she said it I had to pause for a moment to realize that she was addressing me, and from there on in I got a little rush every time she said it. It really made a difference in my day.

Personally, I think I do better with 3rd person than 1st person; I can easily direct someone to see "the Captain" or "my lord husband", but I find it embarrassing to address Jeff directly as "my lord husband". I have less difficulty with the children and will often address them as a "knave" or "lout". Problem with that is that they're not old enough to know the term and sometimes don't know I'm talking about them unless they're standing right next to me and I make a point of looking at them.

This question of forms of address is something I personally intend to work on at our next encampment. I'm going to decide how everyone should be addressed, and then I'm going to stick to it!

Likewise, I'm also going to turn a deaf ear to "Hey Gwen"!

If you are portraying your character, using forms of address should be more a matter of figuring out the correct honorific than worrying about 21st century issues. BTW, Gwen, I was shooting for "Mistress" vice "Hey"- sorry if I gooned it, still getting my reenactment legs.

I find portrayal to be an on/off switch, however. For example, SCA/Adrian style events don't cut it for being able to do portrayals. I mean, really, how can one react to a "queen" who walks up to me, sans necessary entourage, and asks me where the portapotties are?

Relating that to reenactment, I would never call Jeff "Tristan", for example. If I'm in character, he's (at least) "Captain". If I'm not, he's "Jeff".

I think that addressing someone outside of a reenactment context by their character's name is injurious to good portrayal. It weakens the on/off switch. Besides which, it's kinda silly.

--------------------

quote:

---

...I mean, really, how can one react to a "queen" who walks up to me, sans necessary entourage, and asks me where the portapotties are?

---

Majesty, our lady of the blue waters may be found standing in yonder glade. [waves hand in general direction of portapotties]

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Though without entourage or appropriate visual clues, like clothing or a piece of jewelry, this can be difficult.

Seriously though, 1st person, unless you have a thespian bent, can be difficult to master. I try, but if I have to stop and think about it, I do an auto-century shift to 21st c self. Ugh! It takes a lot for me to be able to acknowledge that someone has addressed me by my persona name and not my given one or for me to call Bob by Etienne.

We did have a conversation about this on the board a while ago. I believe part of it was how a woman might address her husband and how social equals and betters to lowers would address each other. Was it madam, mistress, or with the familiar if the person was a friend? (not looking for an answer, just reiterating some of the gist) Then it devolved into geographic location. I don't think anything was resolved. Though it would be nice to get a small terminology/geographic equivalent piece together.

Even quite recently - about the 1960s, in the UK - it would be a definite breach of etiquette to address a social superior as anything other than "Mr Xyz" except at his explicit request, which would not be routine.

The further back one goes, the more prounounced this tendency becomes - the Duke of Welllington invariably referred to his own son as "The Marquis of Douro" when talking about him, and even when actually writing to him!

Go back to the c15th, and you can easily find yourself addressing even children of superior social rank as "My lord Edward" or whatever - it's frequent in account books of the period.

The whole thing takes some getting used to, but it's much easier if you can use names which are close to peopl'e actual names - my friend Thomas can stay as "Thomas" in the c15th without a problem. Unfortunately, if you have English speakers portraying Burgundians,like most people on this board, that isn't going to be as easy. I'm in the same boat, as my name (Neil) isn't in common usage in c15th England, either.

The only way around it is either a) really, really, concentrate or b) ALWAYS use character names, so that you always refer to Bob as "Etienne", when talking to or about him. It can get confusing, however, when you realise that you don't actually know a friend's actual name anymore.....

Incidentally, if you're supposd to be speaking French or German, remember that you have a different form of "you" for social superiors compared to close friends - the old du/tu thing strikes again.

I thought Royalty didn't have bodily functions? I am shocked!

And David, you are correct and I owe you an apology- upon reflection it does seem that you called me "Mistress" at the event. I'm sorry for lumping you in with the other louts of no account and indeterminite parentage.

So here's a question for you specifically, since you skate between groups- do you ever have a hard time remembering the correct honorific to use in various circumstances? For example, at Red Company events, I am the "ranking" female, as I am the Captain's wife; all the other women in the camp are below me in class except for Jeanette, the banker's wife, who is my peer. Jeannette and I should therefore have the highest honorific of the women in camp. Let us say for example that Jeannette and I should be addressed as "Madam", and all the other women in the camp "Mistress", or "Goodwife". if that term fits (can someone tell me f that is a 15th C. term please?) This includes but is not limited to Anne Marie, Genot, Joan, Irmele, etc.

On the other hand, if you were to attend an SCA event in Seattle, Anne Marie is Mistress Anne Marie, Baroness Madrone, and (I think) properly addressed as "Your Excellency". As a double Peer, landed Baroness etc, etc, etc, she outranks me by light years.

If you went to a Red Company event one day and a SCA event the next day, would you have a problem "switching hats" so to speak, and muddle the forms of address?

I suppose this is really a question for Genot, who is AM's apprentice and retainer in the SCA, and was second mess cook (and therefore "outranked" AM) at the Red Company event.

Very interesting topic!

Simply have the character at the top of the social pyramid at the event treat it as such every time it happens, and dish out a punishment of whatever the medieval equivalent of twenty pushups or doubling around the parade ground in full kit is.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ginevra:
So here's a question for you specifically, since you skate between groups- do you ever have a hard time remembering the correct honorific to use in various circumstances? Gwen[/B]

---

Well, in general I ignore many of their conventions. Why memorize incorrect forms? I aim at late 16th English terms of address as I portray a Northumbriam artisan circa 1594. So, I end up calling darn near everyone Master/Mistress, occasionally Cousin or Sir/Madame depending on social status. I really, really try to avoid Milord for non nobles.

For rank types, I call them what they want me to. I believe that "Your Majesty" is Jacobean, but who am I to argue with a Queen? (I just show them where the portapotties are )

I rarely get any flack about this. SCA types occasionally whine about Master. Still since by their rules, I'm overstating their position rather understating, only a few twits have taken real offence.

The real problem is trying to do a characterization in that weird half world of the modern and archaic that exists at events. At SCA events I usually don't bother doing much besides showing up and fencing. Locally at least, the Adrians are more tolerant of such things, so I do more character acting. Even so, it's typically in set pieces such as hanging around the list field or approaching the local Duchess with a message.

BTW, I'm not typically on the internet this much, I'm just stuck at home with a cold. And I was supposed to overnight in Monterey today *sniff*

--------------------

The first use of the term 'Majesty' addressing English royalty datesmto Henry VII reign - no doubt due to his infereority complex andlack of pedegree, and to some degree influenced by his extended continental stays.

It is my understanding through Richard III's reing, that the title of address given to English Royalty (including Dukes) was 'Your Grace'

On a side note, I'm only Eitienne to the Crapauds, I'm Stephen to any good, Godfearing English intimate.

When we were out in '98, I spent all the event addressing Jeff as 'Captain', 'Sir Tristan', or 'My Lord'. As I recall, Jeff was taken aback on occasion. I did dreadfully addressing Gwen however, as I was unsure how to address her. Dreadfuly bad form to address an officer or social superior by their given name, although it would be quite proper to address an inferior - especially one not of the second estate by their given name.

A good example of forms of address between husbands and wives (at least of the gentry) is found in the Paston letters.

Time to wade through 'The Babies booke of Manners'.

--------------------

Now that I'm thinking about it, I may be making a mistake in just using the 16th century terms in 1471. Gwen already mentioned "Mistress" is ok, so I guess I'm safe there, at least.

Maybe somebody out there could list the basic forms of address used at the time. Don't look at me, I apparently can confuse Henry VII with James I

[ 05-22-2002: Message edited by: David Parish-Whittaker ]

--------------------

the SCA is not re-enactment. Titles that are medievally appropriate are not appropriate in the SCA, any more than titles in medieval re-enactment would be appropriate in the workplace .

that said, I address pretty much everyone as madame or sir. Maitresse is good too. I dont know that I've thought about the social stratifications of these terms much as I dont know what the MEDIEVAL mindset was, and I dont want to presume.

When I go from the re-enactment setting to the SCA setting, I continue in this mold, using madame and sir. If some guy gets twitchy thinking I just called him a "knight", I point out that my "sir" has a small "S" just as my lord/my lady (standard SCA terms of address) are not my Lord/my Lady (denoting an SCA granted rank).

it has been pointed out that as I hold some rank in the SCA (that and a nickle will buy you...well, not much ), I am allowed more leeway but I have yet to see anyone get all over Genot or any of the rest of my crew who uses the same terms I do, and we have SCA bigwigs coming to visit all the time at events. The ones I choose to spend my time with arent hung up on SCA titles either, often coming from a re-enactment background as well.

When approached by some guy or gal in a big shiney crown thing, or someone who through their dress, carriage and retainers is obviously important, I pay them all due reverence.

this is still a work in progress...I currently have to juggle my medievla mindset and the SCA game a lot more than I ever did before, but so far so good. Just remember that its two different games, and when in ROme ....

hope this helps,
--AM

--------------------