Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris)

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Kelly Graham

Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris)

Legg inn av Kelly Graham » 30 aug 2004 05:45:09

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:K3jYc.12259$D7.11332@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Pierre Aronax wrote:
"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:G2aYc.11491$D7.10870@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

<snip>

No objection on that. My point was only that to translate "Andegavorum
comes" by "count of Anjou", particularly in a general discussion, is not
a
problem since what is Anjou is not a big problem, same thing for calling
a
"Francorum rex" a "king of France", since "king of France" is indeed the
correct translation of "Francorum rex" in the 13th century and after (so
for
coherency why not calling the previous kings also "king of France"?). But
"Francorum dux" is a different animal: it does not mean "count of France"
or
"count of the vassals in France", or at least that is not so clear that
"Francorum dux" here means only an authority over the people living in a
spe
cific geographical aera rather than a dignity between all the Franks in
all
the kingdom. There is a county of Anjou, but what would have been exactly
a
duchy of France is less clear. That is way I think it is better to
translate
"Francorum dux" by "duke of the Franks", and that is what French
historians
generally do, even when the call Hugh Capet, for example, "king of
France"
(and not "king of the Franks").

Without refuting your opinion, I think that (quite apart from the odd
informal use of "dux Francie") the title "Francorum dux" can be taken to
mean "duke of Francia" in the limited sense that the holder was uniquely
placed within Francia between the king and all the other territorial
rulers.

That's exactly how I understand the title. However, at least in French, "Duc
de France" looks to imply a territorial dukedom of France distinct from
France/Francia (the kingdom) and comprised inside it, which can be
confusing. At least, that's how I feel it.

In other words, there was a dukedom of France, but not a duchy.

Exactly. I would not have express that so well because of my poor English.
Nevertheless, I maintain that it is better, for the abovesaid reason and in
view of the short existence of the title and of the rarity of the word
"Francia" to designet it, to call the duchy "duchy of the Franks" rather
than "duchy of France".

Pierre

______________________________

FWIW ... in this case, alot... what are the SPECIFIC definitions of "Rex" verses "Dux" ?
That might help to clarify a "proper"-title.

Pardon me... I'm just a stickler about the use and abuse of words. My mother wanted to
be an English-teacher :)

Wasn't "Dux" originally a military rank or title ?

Kelly Paul Graham

Peter Stewart

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 30 aug 2004 05:45:10

Kelly Graham wrote:

FWIW ... in this case, alot... what are the SPECIFIC definitions of "Rex" verses "Dux" ?
That might help to clarify a "proper"-title.


I'm afraid I don't understand what you are getting at - "rex" is king,
"dux" is duke, and there is no conflict between these terms in the
question at hand. The discussion so far is about the correct, or
permissible, way/s to translate "Francorum dux" given that this meant
"duke of the Franks" and there was no duchy of France.

Pierre prefers a literal rendering, and I agree with him. It's worth
noting however that some few variant occurrences can be found in
medieval documents, mainly in narrative rather than diplomatic sources.

Hugo Capet became so powerful under the failing Carolingian dynasty that
he exercised virtually sovereign authority over the regnum of Francia
before being elected king of the Franks. One possible rationale for
calling him "duke of Francia" before 987 might be an anachronistic one,
that his dukedom was effectively conterminous with Francia at the time,
although not territorial in a strict sense - in this regard it is
_vaguely_ like a modern British dukedom, such as that of Devonshire
which is a county but not a duchy.

Peter Stewart

Ian Cairns

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Ian Cairns » 30 aug 2004 23:45:43

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:z8xYc.12884$D7.11731@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Kelly Graham wrote:


<snip>

... a modern British dukedom, such as that of Devonshire which is a county
but not a duchy.

I think you may have that the other way around. There is a Duke of
Devonshire and a county of Devon (sometimes, but more rarely, called
Devonshire).

Regards
Ian

Peter Stewart

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 31 aug 2004 00:01:22

Ian Cairns wrote:
"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:z8xYc.12884$D7.11731@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

Kelly Graham wrote:



snip

... a modern British dukedom, such as that of Devonshire which is a county
but not a duchy.


I think you may have that the other way around. There is a Duke of
Devonshire and a county of Devon (sometimes, but more rarely, called
Devonshire).

No, the other way round would be to say there is a duchy of Devonshire
but not a county, which is patently untrue.

As you said, the county of Devon is sometimes called Devonshire - ergo,
there is a county of Devonshire, as it may be and is called. There is
also a dukedom of Devonshire, obviously, since there is a duke. But
there is not a duchy.

There is also, of course, an earldom of Devon.

Peter Stewart

Ian Cairns

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Ian Cairns » 31 aug 2004 02:59:36

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:SsNYc.13606$D7.2239@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Ian Cairns wrote:
"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:z8xYc.12884$D7.11731@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

Kelly Graham wrote:



snip

... a modern British dukedom, such as that of Devonshire which is a
county but not a duchy.


I think you may have that the other way around. There is a Duke of
Devonshire and a county of Devon (sometimes, but more rarely, called
Devonshire).

No, the other way round would be to say there is a duchy of Devonshire but
not a county, which is patently untrue.

As you said, the county of Devon is sometimes called Devonshire - ergo,
there is a county of Devonshire, as it may be and is called. There is also
a dukedom of Devonshire, obviously, since there is a duke. But there is
not a duchy.

There is also, of course, an earldom of Devon.

Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1975):
============================
Duchy 1. The territory ruled by a duke or duchess

Dukedom 1. The territory ruled by a duke; a duchy.

Dukery 1. A dukedom.

Regards
Ian

Peter Stewart

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 31 aug 2004 04:31:03

Ian Cairns wrote:
"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:SsNYc.13606$D7.2239@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

Ian Cairns wrote:

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:z8xYc.12884$D7.11731@news-server.bigpond.net.au...


Kelly Graham wrote:



snip

... a modern British dukedom, such as that of Devonshire which is a
county but not a duchy.


I think you may have that the other way around. There is a Duke of
Devonshire and a county of Devon (sometimes, but more rarely, called
Devonshire).

No, the other way round would be to say there is a duchy of Devonshire but
not a county, which is patently untrue.

As you said, the county of Devon is sometimes called Devonshire - ergo,
there is a county of Devonshire, as it may be and is called. There is also
a dukedom of Devonshire, obviously, since there is a duke. But there is
not a duchy.

There is also, of course, an earldom of Devon.


Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1975):
============================
Duchy 1. The territory ruled by a duke or duchess

Dukedom 1. The territory ruled by a duke; a duchy.

Dukery 1. A dukedom.

Condensed dictionaries can be quite misleading.

The distinction in current usage between "duchy" and "dukedom" seems to
have escaped you and your favoured lexicographer. The new OED would no
doubt clarify this point.

Obviously the two words CAN be interchangeable, and equally obviously I
was NOT using them in that way. Quibbling about this, and persisting in
such a quibble, is a waste of your time and mine.

A duchy, of which there are only two in England, is the territory of a
duke or duchess as your dictionary says, that is Lancaster and Cornwall.

All the rest are merely dukedoms, that is titles of honour confering
privilege (at least until recently) and prestige but not territorial power.

In simple terms, a duchy is real, in the form of lands and authority,
while a dukedom is notional, manifested only in social rank.

The dukedom of Hugo Capet was not exactly like a modern dukedom in this
respect, which is why I emphasised that the comparison was _vague_.

Peter Stewart

Peter Stewart

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 31 aug 2004 10:23:07

Ian Cairns wrote:

Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1975):
============================
Duchy 1. The territory ruled by a duke or duchess

Dukedom 1. The territory ruled by a duke; a duchy.

Dukery 1. A dukedom.

I don't have a copy of the Shorter Oxford Dictionary - can anyone tell
us if it really gives only the one definition for each of the words
above, or has Ian Cairns simply failed to read through the entry to find
an alternative sense of "dukedom" as opposed to "duchy"?

In case the SOE is actually as remiss as his post suggests, Funk &
Wagnells helpfully gives the following:

"duchy...The territory or dominion of a duke; a dukedom."

"dukedom...1. A duchy. 2. The dignity or title of a duke."

Since the gist of my post was about the distinction between these terms,
rather than using them as synonyms, quite obviously I meant duchy in the
first sense given, for the dominion, and dukedom in the second, for the
dignity & title.

Peter Stewart

Ian Cairns

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Ian Cairns » 31 aug 2004 12:07:36

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:LzWYc.14262$D7.6302@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Ian Cairns wrote:

Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1975):
============================
Duchy 1. The territory ruled by a duke or duchess

Dukedom 1. The territory ruled by a duke; a duchy.

Dukery 1. A dukedom.

I don't have a copy of the Shorter Oxford Dictionary - can anyone tell us
if it really gives only the one definition for each of the words above, or
has Ian Cairns simply failed to read through the entry to find an
alternative sense of "dukedom" as opposed to "duchy"?

Perhaps Ian Cairns read through and saw that there was more than one
meaning. Perhaps Ian Cairns copied the number 1 from the SOED definition.
Perhaps Ian Cairns was indicating that the primary meanings were synonyms.

In case the SOE is actually as remiss as his post suggests, Funk &
Wagnells helpfully gives the following:

"duchy...The territory or dominion of a duke; a dukedom."

"dukedom...1. A duchy. 2. The dignity or title of a duke."

Since the gist of my post was about the distinction between these terms,
rather than using them as synonyms, quite obviously I meant duchy in the
first sense given, for the dominion, and dukedom in the second, for the
dignity & title.

Quite obviously... They are synonyms and they have different meanings.

Earlier you said that this thread was a waste of your time and mine.

Ian

Peter Stewart

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 31 aug 2004 12:37:32

Ian Cairns wrote:
"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:LzWYc.14262$D7.6302@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

Ian Cairns wrote:


Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1975):
============================
Duchy 1. The territory ruled by a duke or duchess

Dukedom 1. The territory ruled by a duke; a duchy.

Dukery 1. A dukedom.

I don't have a copy of the Shorter Oxford Dictionary - can anyone tell us
if it really gives only the one definition for each of the words above, or
has Ian Cairns simply failed to read through the entry to find an
alternative sense of "dukedom" as opposed to "duchy"?


Perhaps Ian Cairns read through and saw that there was more than one
meaning. Perhaps Ian Cairns copied the number 1 from the SOED definition.
Perhaps Ian Cairns was indicating that the primary meanings were synonyms.


In case the SOE is actually as remiss as his post suggests, Funk &
Wagnells helpfully gives the following:

"duchy...The territory or dominion of a duke; a dukedom."

"dukedom...1. A duchy. 2. The dignity or title of a duke."

Since the gist of my post was about the distinction between these terms,
rather than using them as synonyms, quite obviously I meant duchy in the
first sense given, for the dominion, and dukedom in the second, for the
dignity & title.


Quite obviously... They are synonyms and they have different meanings.

Earlier you said that this thread was a waste of your time and mine.

Yes - so why I wonder did you prolong it by putting forward a selected
definition without revealing that the SOED actually gave you the
information to comprehend my post properly? Honesty and common sense are
qualities that SGM readers exppect in posts, and yours - apparently
deliberately, from your wish to prolong this miserable discussion that
only shows you up for a fool or deceiver - lacked both.

Peter Stewart

Peter Stewart

Re: Definition of Terms (was Re: Charlemagne to Agnes Harris

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 31 aug 2004 12:51:52

Peter Stewart wrote:

Ian Cairns wrote:

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote in message
news:LzWYc.14262$D7.6302@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

Ian Cairns wrote:


Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1975):
============================
Duchy 1. The territory ruled by a duke or duchess

Dukedom 1. The territory ruled by a duke; a duchy.

Dukery 1. A dukedom.


I don't have a copy of the Shorter Oxford Dictionary - can anyone
tell us if it really gives only the one definition for each of the
words above, or has Ian Cairns simply failed to read through the
entry to find an alternative sense of "dukedom" as opposed to "duchy"?



Perhaps Ian Cairns read through and saw that there was more than one
meaning. Perhaps Ian Cairns copied the number 1 from the SOED
definition. Perhaps Ian Cairns was indicating that the primary
meanings were synonyms.

I didn't notice this drivel before - perhaps Ian Cairns needs to learn
how to use a dictionary. Perhaps Ian Cairns needs to think why it is
that more than primary definitions are given in them, which he
conveniently ignored while trying to gain a fraudulent pont. Perhaps Ian
Cairns needs to learn that English is a rich language in which words are
not confined to a single meaning each - hence the use of dictionaries
for native speakers, and the alternative definitions they take the
trouble to provide as necessary.

Peter Stewart

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»