Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Probably more than you needed to know about Brittany...

Expand Messages
  • s_krasley@recordtrak.com
    ... Now I know why they have portraits of themselves painted while they hold an ermine/weasel...... To error is human, to weasel out is real art. - Brynn
    Message 1 of 4 , Jun 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In Authentic_SCA@y..., Steven Proctor <sproctor@b...> wrote:
      > LOL. You *do* know something about the Dukes of Brittany, then...
      > ROFL......
      >
      > Morgan
      >
      >
      > "Amy L. Hornburg Heilveil" wrote:
      >
      > >> and the Duke a powerful vassal, merely gives him more
      > >> weasel room...
      > >
      > >
      > > and I read this as
      > > and the Duke, a powerful weasel.......
      >

      Now I know why they have portraits of themselves painted while they
      hold an ermine/weasel......
      To error is human, to weasel out is real art.
      - Brynn
    • Steven Proctor
      It was full liege homage, according to several of my sources. Meaning he acknowledged the King of France as his overlord in Brittany. It s not like the Dukes
      Message 2 of 4 , Jun 4, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        It was full liege homage, according to several of my sources. Meaning he
        acknowledged the King of France as his overlord in Brittany. It's not
        like the Dukes of Brittany were fully independent of the French Crown
        even before that, despite what later 'separatists' may say in basis of
        that claim. This was just the step from peripheral client state to full
        vassalage.

        You don't have to be granted lands to be a vassal. You may also become a
        vassal by subjugating your current lands to another, theoretically more
        powerful, noble. This is what the Dukes of Brittany did...

        I was incorrect about the year. It was 1297...

        Morgan





        caoilte wrote:

        > What did the contract say? If he became a vassal to the king of by
        > being
        > given fiefs that were not in Brittany or were not all of Brittany,
        > hdet hde
        > status of Brittany was not affected. Your saying that the Duke
        > surrendered
        > Brittany and recieved it back as a fief. Is this what happened? The
        > actual
        > fief that was granted to the Duke in exchange for his service is all
        > important here.
        >
        > Dorje

        --
        The countdown had stalled at T minus 69 seconds when Desiree, the first
        female ape to go up in space, winked at me slyly and pouted her thick,
        rubbery lips unmistakably -- the first of many such advances during what
        would prove to be the longest, and most memorable, space voyage of my
        career.
      • atterlep@cs.com
        ... When you say that the Duke s oath of fealty and homage to the King of France made Brittany part of France, it seems to me that you re combining two
        Message 3 of 4 , Jun 4, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In Authentic_SCA@y..., Steven Proctor <sproctor@b...> wrote:
          > It was full liege homage, according to several of my sources.
          > Meaning he acknowledged the King of France as his overlord in
          > Brittany. It's not like the Dukes of Brittany were fully
          > independent of the French Crown even before that, despite what
          > later 'separatists' may say in basis of that claim. This was just
          > the step from peripheral client state to full vassalage.

          When you say that the Duke's oath of fealty and homage to the King of
          France made Brittany "part of France," it seems to me that you're
          combining two totally different political paradigms. When we think
          of "France" we're thinking of a modern nation-state, something that
          arguably didn't exist in 1300. Even when the idea of "France" as a
          nation became clear, it didn't necessarily include all the lands
          whose lords swore fealty to the King of France. Didn't someone just
          point out that Joan of Arc talked of "going into France" when she
          travelled north from her hometown?

          The lines of fealty in the 13th century were tangled--for example,
          King John was a vassal of the Pope, but no one claims that England
          was "part of the Papal States." There's obviously more to nationhood
          than independent fealty.

          Fairfax
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.