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

Historical Novel Society Re: "Boy" or "young man" for 17yr old in Tudor Uk?

Expand Messages
  • singwiththespirit
    Except John said is not practical if you don t know whether the young man s name is John. I would use young man . Youth seems too poetical, and boy seems
    Message 1 of 18 , Jun 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Except "John said" is not practical if you don't know whether the young man's name is John.

      I would use "young man". Youth seems too poetical, and boy seems anachronistic, since young men of that age in Tudor England were often already married with children of their own.

      Speaking of anachronisms - "Tudor UK" in your subject line is also a glaring anachronism. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland didn't come into existence until 197 years after the death of Elizabeth I, the last Tudor monarch. The UK was legally established on 1 January 1800. At that time, the Kingdom of Great Britain had existed as a legal entity for about 93 years - since the Acts of Union were ratified in England and Ireland in 1707, during the reign of Queen Anne (the last Stuart monarch of England).

      And for the first 60 years of the 120-year Tudor dynasty (1483-1603), Wales was still a separate legal entity from England. What finally placed Wales within the Kingdom of England were two laws passed by Henry VIII's 5th and 8th Parliaments, respectively:

      1536 - An Acte for Laws & Justice to be ministred in Wales in like fourme as it is in this Realme (27 Henry VIII c. 26)

      1543 - An Acte for certaine Ordinaunces in the Kinges Majesties Domynion and Principalitie of Wales (34 and 35 Henry VIII c. 26)

      So even the idea of a "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland" would have been alien, except as a possible political ambition, to most people in the Tudor era.

      Karen Mercedes


      --- In HistoricalNovelSociety@yahoogroups.com, Benjamin Barrett <gogaku@...> wrote:
      >
      > IMHO, the best option is
      >
      > John said
      >
      > I find substitutions like "the youth," "the young man" and "the teenager" to be tiresome. That alone is not enough to make me quit reading, but it is a small factor in whether I want to try another book from an author.
      >
      > Ben Barrett
      > Seattle, WA
      >
      > On May 30, 2011, at 9:09 AM, joe979xx wrote:
      >
      > > I'm still on the fence... I think these are my best options.
      > >
      > > the youth said...
      > > the young man said...
      > > the teenager....
      > >
      > > Thanks for your replies!
      > > Joe
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • John Yeoman
      Here are some colloquial terms used for boy in the late 16th century. All are referenced in the literature of the time: bantling. boykin. `little breeches .
      Message 2 of 18 , Jun 2, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Here are some colloquial terms used for 'boy' in the late 16th century. All are referenced in the literature of the time:

        bantling. boykin. `little breeches'. imp. dainty lad (plump & thriving). faggot (naughty child). a fierce child (happy). my genealogy (offspring). `this tribe of infantry'. pickle. pup. a bud (endearment) s. a kinchin s. a tit s. a faggot (naughty child) m. grub (dirty) m. magpoy m. base-born (illegitimate) d. whelp (young boy) d. bachelor (young man) e. bairn (child) e. fitz (prefix applied to a bastard eg Fitzwilliam) d. jack in the box (baby in the womb). wantons (spoilt children)

        Forgive my pedantry. I did my PhD in creative writing with particular reference to Jacobethan language!

        John Yeoman, Writers' Village, the center for story ideas:
        http://www.writers-village.org/tips

        > Except "John said" is not practical if you don't know whether the young man's name is John.
        >
        > I would use "young man". Youth seems too poetical, and boy seems anachronistic, since young men of that age in Tudor England were often already married with children of their own.
        >
        > Speaking of anachronisms - "Tudor UK" in your subject line is also a glaring anachronism. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland didn't come into existence until 197 years after the death of Elizabeth I, the last Tudor monarch. The UK was legally established on 1 January 1800. At that time, the Kingdom of Great Britain had existed as a legal entity for about 93 years - since the Acts of Union were ratified in England and Ireland in 1707, during the reign of Queen Anne (the last Stuart monarch of England).
        >
        > And for the first 60 years of the 120-year Tudor dynasty (1483-1603), Wales was still a separate legal entity from England. What finally placed Wales within the Kingdom of England were two laws passed by Henry VIII's 5th and 8th Parliaments, respectively:
        >
        > 1536 - An Acte for Laws & Justice to be ministred in Wales in like fourme as it is in this Realme (27 Henry VIII c. 26)
        >
        > 1543 - An Acte for certaine Ordinaunces in the Kinges Majesties Domynion and Principalitie of Wales (34 and 35 Henry VIII c. 26)
        >
        > So even the idea of a "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland" would have been alien, except as a possible political ambition, to most people in the Tudor era.
        >
        > Karen Mercedes
        >
        >
        > --- In HistoricalNovelSociety@yahoogroups.com, Benjamin Barrett <gogaku@> wrote:
        > >
        > > IMHO, the best option is
        > >
        > > John said
        > >
        > > I find substitutions like "the youth," "the young man" and "the teenager" to be tiresome. That alone is not enough to make me quit reading, but it is a small factor in whether I want to try another book from an author.
        > >
        > > Ben Barrett
        > > Seattle, WA
        > >
        > > On May 30, 2011, at 9:09 AM, joe979xx wrote:
        > >
        > > > I'm still on the fence... I think these are my best options.
        > > >
        > > > the youth said...
        > > > the young man said...
        > > > the teenager....
        > > >
        > > > Thanks for your replies!
        > > > Joe
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.