> My questions are, then: What's the difference, if any, between being
> Darlene Dogbiter or Darlene, Lady Dogbiter? When did the second usage
> into currency? If the second usage is pre-1600, are there any SCA
> customs that
> prevent Darlene from calling herself Darlene, Lady Dogbiter?
It's a matter of territorial designation. Darlene, Lady Dogbiter lays claim
to the patrimony of Dogbiter in the same manner as the Territorial Baronage
is styled with the name of their group. +CORPORA+ (VII.D. et seq.) prohibits
titles that confer 'landedness' with the exception of Kingdoms, Territorial
Principalities and Territorial Baronies. So, even though the X, Lord X, may
be found in older SCA documents it was never an actual bestowal and is not
permitted in these latter days.
Referencing a landholder by the name of his holding was not at all uncommon
(at least in England) in period. In many cases a secondary title was
captioned as "Lord X" with x being the name of the principal seat of the