Your such droll individual who can't back anything up. You're weak
David Cohen.

Do me a big favor: don't reply to me anymore. I'm sure a smart guy
like you can manage that. But then again, Joe McMIllan can't do it.

McDermit had just been deposed by the High King, McDermitt needed
troops to retake his throne. The deal was that if Strongbow won
Strongbow would become McDermit's heir. Henry II cleverly waited for
Strongbow to finish reconquering Leinster, and then swooped in and
claimed most of the spoils for the English crown.

Yeeesss, de Clare was in not too good a finacial situation at the
time, so Henry II asked him to go on a mercinary expedition
(feudalism),

I'm not leading here, I'm suggesting. You say something else was
introduced that (might be) heraldic. Again, what evidence do you
offer?

Just as other styles of art are not attributed to any single person,
heraldry was not attributed to anyone in particular in Ireland.
Individual coats would be attributed to someone, usually the founder
of a family or one of it's more prominent members, but heraldry itself
was simply a form of art used to identify people. Especially on the
battlefield.

This is irrlevent to the three questions.
How is it irrelevant?

You asked from whom Irish heraldry was usually attributed. I answered
and explained why.

It isn't my fault that the true answers to your questions are not the
ones you want to hear.

Am I completely misunderstanding, or did you just say that Strongbow
went into Ireland? Nick, I knew that when I asked the 3 questions of
Joseph McMillan originally. (Your answer) seems to indicate that
Irish heraldry had some other origin (seed)... I submit that
Strongbow / Henry II was (the seed).

So, when you say that (your answers) don't match (what I [want to
hear]), I don't follow you at all.

I would say here Nick, that it's you who is misunderstanding. ( I
knew where [ I ] was going...).

Just as heraldry cannot be attributed to any individual, it cannot be
said to derive from any individual.
Nick

Everything has its beginning. In those days, in a country as small as
Ireland, those beginnings came with some heavy influence - that's what
I was getting at. (That influence is battled pretty much even to this
day, accords not withstanding). That influence, overshadowed Irish
heraldry, yes? So, that meant, that by and large, Irish heraldry,
wasn't really and truly Irish was it. Just like teh English influence
of heraldry in the American colonies --- which is what Washington was
cautioning William Barton about.

My arguments are very consistent about this stuff.

Now, if it's all the same to you Nick, I'd rather discuss the thread
topic.

Start another thread on Irish heraldry and we can go on there.
You asked three questions, and demanded they be answered. I answered
them, and I'm going off-topic?

Nick, I asked three questions -- of Joseph McMillan. As I said
earlier herein; I'm very happy to discuss (anything ) with anybody,
but I don't appreciate it when what I say is taken out of context.

The subject of the thread was Ireland and this fool Castleshort. (My
comment), thrown in, had to do with the status of Irish heraldy: which
Sean Murphy validated (thank youy again Sean), and Joseph McMillan, as
usual, had to jump in with a remark, not about the topic of thread,
but to challenge me - yet again.

Does anyone actually read Greg's posts?

On Sep 25, 8:19 pm, Greg <scoti... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:



McDermit had just been deposed by the High King, McDermitt needed
troops to retake his throne. The deal was that if Strongbow won
Strongbow would become McDermit's heir. Henry II cleverly waited for
Strongbow to finish reconquering Leinster, and then swooped in and
claimed most of the spoils for the English crown.

Yeeesss, de Clare was in not too good a finacial situation at the
time, so Henry II asked him to go on a mercinary expedition
(feudalism),

What does this have to do with your three questions?





I'm not leading here, I'm suggesting.  You say something else was
introduced that (might be) heraldic.  Again, what evidence do you
offer?

Just as other styles of art are not attributed to any single person,
heraldry was not attributed to anyone in particular in Ireland.
Individual coats would be attributed to someone, usually the founder
of a family or one of it's more prominent members, but heraldry itself
was simply a form of art used to identify people. Especially on the
battlefield.

This is irrlevent to the three questions.
How is it irrelevant?

You asked from whom Irish heraldry was usually attributed.  I answered
and explained why.

It isn't my fault that the true answers to your questions are not the
ones you want to hear.

Am I completely misunderstanding, or did you just say that Strongbow
went into Ireland? Nick, I knew that when I asked the 3 questions of
Joseph McMillan originally.  (Your answer) seems to indicate that
Irish heraldry had some other origin (seed)...  I submit that
Strongbow / Henry II was (the seed).

Dude, you really suck at this.

This is the answer to your second question. Irish heraldry was never
attributed to any single person. Period. If they are, in fact, three
questions they are separate and can be answered separately. If they
are not three questions it was pretty stupid of you to go around
demanding Joe answer "three questions" when you meant you wanted him
to answer one.

BTW here's another potential seed for the arms of Connacht:http://www.mobrien.com/obrien.html
Apparently they were using their arms for more than a century before
Henry II showed up, and even transferred those arms to a German
monastery.

Which brings up one of the most Irish sources of heraldry possible --
the catholic Church in Ireland.

So, when you say that (your answers) don't match (what I [want to
hear]), I don't follow you at all.

  I would say here Nick, that it's you who is misunderstanding. ( I
knew where [ I ] was going...).

You were headed straight into the weeds of BSland. You were going to
claim that as Strongbow first brought heraldry to Ireland clearly all
Irish heraldic devices were derived entirely from the English crown.

Just as heraldry cannot be attributed to any individual, it cannot be
said to derive from any individual.
Nick

Everything has its beginning. In those days, in a country as small as
Ireland, those beginnings came with some heavy influence - that's what
I was getting at. (That influence is battled pretty much even to this
day, accords not withstanding).  That influence, overshadowed Irish
heraldry, yes?  So, that meant, that by and large, Irish heraldry,
wasn't really and truly Irish was it.  Just like teh English influence
of heraldry in the American colonies --- which is what Washington was
cautioning William Barton about.

My arguments are very consistent about this stuff.

Dude, that is the single dumbest thing you have ever said. Note the
preceding sentence was, by definition, not ad hominem because it did
not insult Greg the man, it insulted things Greg said. Or do I need to
translate ad hominem from the Latin?

Heraldic practice is international. That is pretty much the entire
point. Learning the rules as practiced in Kamchatka will give you 90%
of what you need to know about Serbian, Swedish, Italian, or Canadian
arms.

Heck Irish Heraldry was always formally separate from English
heraldry. The island  had it's own King of Arms, who recognized
concepts like Sept Arms that were anethema to England's College of
Arms.

I'm sure there are many who would argue that heraldry was too strongly
associated with the English to survive the fall of the monarchy.
However those people have never won an election in Ireland. Eamon de
Valera and Brian Cowen have. Valera created a Chief Herald for
Ireland, and even tried to create  a Republican version of the British
system of  armorial grants. Cowen is currently trying to fix mistakes
in Valera's legislation.





Now, if it's all the same to you Nick, I'd rather discuss the thread
topic.

Start another thread on Irish heraldry and we can go on there.
You asked three questions, and demanded they be answered. I answered
them, and I'm going off-topic?

Nick, I asked three questions  -- of Joseph McMillan.  As I said
earlier herein;  I'm very happy to discuss (anything ) with anybody,
but I don't appreciate it when what I say is taken out of context.

The subject of the thread was Ireland and this fool Castleshort.  (My
comment), thrown in, had to do with the status of Irish heraldy: which
Sean Murphy validated (thank youy again Sean), and Joseph McMillan, as
usual, had to jump in with a remark, not about the topic of thread,
but to challenge me - yet again.

What exactly did Murphy say to  validate you?

It would be extremely out of character for him to agree that heraldry
is an English imposition on Ireland.

Nick- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Sep 25, 8:19 pm, Greg <scoti... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:



McDermit had just been deposed by the High King, McDermitt needed
troops to retake his throne. The deal was that if Strongbow won
Strongbow would become McDermit's heir. Henry II cleverly waited for
Strongbow to finish reconquering Leinster, and then swooped in and
claimed most of the spoils for the English crown.

Yeeesss, de Clare was in not too good a finacial situation at the
time, so Henry II asked him to go on a mercinary expedition
(feudalism),

What does this have to do with your three questions?





I'm not leading here, I'm suggesting.  You say something else was
introduced that (might be) heraldic.  Again, what evidence do you
offer?

Just as other styles of art are not attributed to any single person,
heraldry was not attributed to anyone in particular in Ireland.
Individual coats would be attributed to someone, usually the founder
of a family or one of it's more prominent members, but heraldry itself
was simply a form of art used to identify people. Especially on the
battlefield.

This is irrlevent to the three questions.
How is it irrelevant?

You asked from whom Irish heraldry was usually attributed.  I answered
and explained why.

It isn't my fault that the true answers to your questions are not the
ones you want to hear.

Am I completely misunderstanding, or did you just say that Strongbow
went into Ireland? Nick, I knew that when I asked the 3 questions of
Joseph McMillan originally.  (Your answer) seems to indicate that
Irish heraldry had some other origin (seed)...  I submit that
Strongbow / Henry II was (the seed).

Dude, you really suck at this.

This is the answer to your second question. Irish heraldry was never
attributed to any single person. Period. If they are, in fact, three
questions they are separate and can be answered separately. If they
are not three questions it was pretty stupid of you to go around
demanding Joe answer "three questions" when you meant you wanted him
to answer one.

BTW here's another potential seed for the arms of Connacht:http://www.mobrien.com/obrien.html
Apparently they were using their arms for more than a century before
Henry II showed up, and even transferred those arms to a German
monastery.

Which brings up one of the most Irish sources of heraldry possible --
the catholic Church in Ireland.

So, when you say that (your answers) don't match (what I [want to
hear]), I don't follow you at all.

  I would say here Nick, that it's you who is misunderstanding. ( I
knew where [ I ] was going...).

You were headed straight into the weeds of BSland. You were going to
claim that as Strongbow first brought heraldry to Ireland clearly all
Irish heraldic devices were derived entirely from the English crown.

Just as heraldry cannot be attributed to any individual, it cannot be
said to derive from any individual.
Nick

Everything has its beginning. In those days, in a country as small as
Ireland, those beginnings came with some heavy influence - that's what
I was getting at. (That influence is battled pretty much even to this
day, accords not withstanding).  That influence, overshadowed Irish
heraldry, yes?  So, that meant, that by and large, Irish heraldry,
wasn't really and truly Irish was it.  Just like teh English influence
of heraldry in the American colonies --- which is what Washington was
cautioning William Barton about.

My arguments are very consistent about this stuff.

Dude, that is the single dumbest thing you have ever said. Note the
preceding sentence was, by definition, not ad hominem because it did
not insult Greg the man, it insulted things Greg said. Or do I need to
translate ad hominem from the Latin?

Heraldic practice is international. That is pretty much the entire
point. Learning the rules as practiced in Kamchatka will give you 90%
of what you need to know about Serbian, Swedish, Italian, or Canadian
arms.

Heck Irish Heraldry was always formally separate from English
heraldry. The island  had it's own King of Arms, who recognized
concepts like Sept Arms that were anethema to England's College of
Arms.

I'm sure there are many who would argue that heraldry was too strongly
associated with the English to survive the fall of the monarchy.
However those people have never won an election in Ireland. Eamon de
Valera and Brian Cowen have. Valera created a Chief Herald for
Ireland, and even tried to create  a Republican version of the British
system of  armorial grants. Cowen is currently trying to fix mistakes
in Valera's legislation.





Now, if it's all the same to you Nick, I'd rather discuss the thread
topic.

Start another thread on Irish heraldry and we can go on there.
You asked three questions, and demanded they be answered. I answered
them, and I'm going off-topic?

Nick, I asked three questions  -- of Joseph McMillan.  As I said
earlier herein;  I'm very happy to discuss (anything ) with anybody,
but I don't appreciate it when what I say is taken out of context.

The subject of the thread was Ireland and this fool Castleshort.  (My
comment), thrown in, had to do with the status of Irish heraldy: which
Sean Murphy validated (thank youy again Sean), and Joseph McMillan, as
usual, had to jump in with a remark, not about the topic of thread,
but to challenge me - yet again.

What exactly did Murphy say to  validate you?

It would be extremely out of character for him to agree that heraldry
is an English imposition on Ireland.

Nick- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm sure there are many who would argue that heraldry was too strongly
associated with the English to survive the fall of the monarchy.
However those people have never won an election in Ireland. Eamon de
Valera and Brian Cowen have. Valera created a Chief Herald for
Ireland, and even tried to create a Republican version of the British
system of armorial grants. Cowen is currently trying to fix mistakes
in Valera's legislation.

On 26 Sep, 16:48, Nick B II <nicholas... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:





On Sep 25, 8:19 pm, Greg <scoti... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:

McDermit had just been deposed by the High King, McDermitt needed
troops to retake his throne. The deal was that if Strongbow won
Strongbow would become McDermit's heir. Henry II cleverly waited for
Strongbow to finish reconquering Leinster, and then swooped in and
claimed most of the spoils for the English crown.

Yeeesss, de Clare was in not too good a finacial situation at the
time, so Henry II asked him to go on a mercinary expedition
(feudalism),

What does this have to do with your three questions?

I'm not leading here, I'm suggesting.  You say something else was
introduced that (might be) heraldic.  Again, what evidence do you
offer?

Just as other styles of art are not attributed to any single person,
heraldry was not attributed to anyone in particular in Ireland.
Individual coats would be attributed to someone, usually the founder
of a family or one of it's more prominent members, but heraldry itself
was simply a form of art used to identify people. Especially on the
battlefield.

This is irrlevent to the three questions.
How is it irrelevant?

You asked from whom Irish heraldry was usually attributed.  I answered
and explained why.

It isn't my fault that the true answers to your questions are not the
ones you want to hear.

Am I completely misunderstanding, or did you just say that Strongbow
went into Ireland? Nick, I knew that when I asked the 3 questions of
Joseph McMillan originally.  (Your answer) seems to indicate that
Irish heraldry had some other origin (seed)...  I submit that
Strongbow / Henry II was (the seed).

Dude, you really suck at this.

This is the answer to your second question. Irish heraldry was never
attributed to any single person. Period. If they are, in fact, three
questions they are separate and can be answered separately. If they
are not three questions it was pretty stupid of you to go around
demanding Joe answer "three questions" when you meant you wanted him
to answer one.

BTW here's another potential seed for the arms of Connacht:http://www.mobrien.com/obrien.html
Apparently they were using their arms for more than a century before
Henry II showed up, and even transferred those arms to a German
monastery.

Which brings up one of the most Irish sources of heraldry possible --
the catholic Church in Ireland.

So, when you say that (your answers) don't match (what I [want to
hear]), I don't follow you at all.

  I would say here Nick, that it's you who is misunderstanding. ( I
knew where [ I ] was going...).

You were headed straight into the weeds of BSland. You were going to
claim that as Strongbow first brought heraldry to Ireland clearly all
Irish heraldic devices were derived entirely from the English crown.

Just as heraldry cannot be attributed to any individual, it cannot be
said to derive from any individual.
Nick

Everything has its beginning. In those days, in a country as small as
Ireland, those beginnings came with some heavy influence - that's what
I was getting at. (That influence is battled pretty much even to this
day, accords not withstanding).  That influence, overshadowed Irish
heraldry, yes?  So, that meant, that by and large, Irish heraldry,
wasn't really and truly Irish was it.  Just like teh English influence
of heraldry in the American colonies --- which is what Washington was
cautioning William Barton about.

My arguments are very consistent about this stuff.

Dude, that is the single dumbest thing you have ever said. Note the
preceding sentence was, by definition, not ad hominem because it did
not insult Greg the man, it insulted things Greg said. Or do I need to
translate ad hominem from the Latin?

Heraldic practice is international. That is pretty much the entire
point. Learning the rules as practiced in Kamchatka will give you 90%
of what you need to know about Serbian, Swedish, Italian, or Canadian
arms.

Heck Irish Heraldry was always formally separate from English
heraldry. The island  had it's own King of Arms, who recognized
concepts like Sept Arms that were anethema to England's College of
Arms.

I'm sure there are many who would argue that heraldry was too strongly
associated with the English to survive the fall of the monarchy.
However those people have never won an election in Ireland. Eamon de
Valera and Brian Cowen have. Valera created a Chief Herald for
Ireland, and even tried to create  a Republican version of the British
system of  armorial grants. Cowen is currently trying to fix mistakes
in Valera's legislation.

Now, if it's all the same to you Nick, I'd rather discuss the thread
topic.

Start another thread on Irish heraldry and we can go on there.
You asked three questions, and demanded they be answered. I answered
them, and I'm going off-topic?

Nick, I asked three questions  -- of Joseph McMillan.  As I said
earlier herein;  I'm very happy to discuss (anything ) with anybody,
but I don't appreciate it when what I say is taken out of context.

The subject of the thread was Ireland and this fool Castleshort.  (My
comment), thrown in, had to do with the status of Irish heraldy: which
Sean Murphy validated (thank youy again Sean), and Joseph McMillan, as
usual, had to jump in with a remark, not about the topic of thread,
but to challenge me - yet again.

What exactly did Murphy say to  validate you?

It would be extremely out of character for him to agree that heraldry
is an English imposition on Ireland.

Nick- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dude, you're not too good at following along.

I said that Irish herladry has a cloud over it.  Sean agreed.

Strongbow.  You seemed of two opinions: 1 he went over to Ireland
because (he) was invited by MacMurrough and two, that I knew nothing
about it.  (He) wasn't invited, Henry was invited and Henry gave de
Clare the opportunity to make some money.

I slos filled on some blanks on the story.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On 26 Sep, 16:48, Nick B II <nicholas... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:



On Sep 25, 8:19 pm, Greg <scoti... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:

McDermit had just been deposed by the High King, McDermitt needed
troops to retake his throne. The deal was that if Strongbow won
Strongbow would become McDermit's heir. Henry II cleverly waited for
Strongbow to finish reconquering Leinster, and then swooped in and
claimed most of the spoils for the English crown.

Yeeesss, de Clare was in not too good a finacial situation at the
time, so Henry II asked him to go on a mercinary expedition
(feudalism),

What does this have to do with your three questions?

I'm not leading here, I'm suggesting.  You say something else was
introduced that (might be) heraldic.  Again, what evidence do you
offer?

Just as other styles of art are not attributed to any single person,
heraldry was not attributed to anyone in particular in Ireland.
Individual coats would be attributed to someone, usually the founder
of a family or one of it's more prominent members, but heraldry itself
was simply a form of art used to identify people. Especially on the
battlefield.

This is irrlevent to the three questions.
How is it irrelevant?

You asked from whom Irish heraldry was usually attributed.  I answered
and explained why.

It isn't my fault that the true answers to your questions are not the
ones you want to hear.

Am I completely misunderstanding, or did you just say that Strongbow
went into Ireland? Nick, I knew that when I asked the 3 questions of
Joseph McMillan originally.  (Your answer) seems to indicate that
Irish heraldry had some other origin (seed)...  I submit that
Strongbow / Henry II was (the seed).

Dude, you really suck at this.

This is the answer to your second question. Irish heraldry was never
attributed to any single person. Period. If they are, in fact, three
questions they are separate and can be answered separately. If they
are not three questions it was pretty stupid of you to go around
demanding Joe answer "three questions" when you meant you wanted him
to answer one.

BTW here's another potential seed for the arms of Connacht:http://www.mobrien.com/obrien.html
Apparently they were using their arms for more than a century before
Henry II showed up, and even transferred those arms to a German
monastery.

Which brings up one of the most Irish sources of heraldry possible --
the catholic Church in Ireland.

So, when you say that (your answers) don't match (what I [want to
hear]), I don't follow you at all.

  I would say here Nick, that it's you who is misunderstanding. ( I
knew where [ I ] was going...).

You were headed straight into the weeds of BSland. You were going to
claim that as Strongbow first brought heraldry to Ireland clearly all
Irish heraldic devices were derived entirely from the English crown.

Just as heraldry cannot be attributed to any individual, it cannot be
said to derive from any individual.
Nick

Everything has its beginning. In those days, in a country as small as
Ireland, those beginnings came with some heavy influence - that's what
I was getting at. (That influence is battled pretty much even to this
day, accords not withstanding).  That influence, overshadowed Irish
heraldry, yes?  So, that meant, that by and large, Irish heraldry,
wasn't really and truly Irish was it.  Just like teh English influence
of heraldry in the American colonies --- which is what Washington was
cautioning William Barton about.

My arguments are very consistent about this stuff.

Dude, that is the single dumbest thing you have ever said. Note the
preceding sentence was, by definition, not ad hominem because it did
not insult Greg the man, it insulted things Greg said. Or do I need to
translate ad hominem from the Latin?

Heraldic practice is international. That is pretty much the entire
point. Learning the rules as practiced in Kamchatka will give you 90%
of what you need to know about Serbian, Swedish, Italian, or Canadian
arms.

Heck Irish Heraldry was always formally separate from English
heraldry. The island  had it's own King of Arms, who recognized
concepts like Sept Arms that were anethema to England's College of
Arms.

I'm sure there are many who would argue that heraldry was too strongly
associated with the English to survive the fall of the monarchy.
However those people have never won an election in Ireland. Eamon de
Valera and Brian Cowen have. Valera created a Chief Herald for
Ireland, and even tried to create  a Republican version of the British
system of  armorial grants. Cowen is currently trying to fix mistakes
in Valera's legislation.

Now, if it's all the same to you Nick, I'd rather discuss the thread
topic.

Start another thread on Irish heraldry and we can go on there.
You asked three questions, and demanded they be answered. I answered
them, and I'm going off-topic?

Nick, I asked three questions  -- of Joseph McMillan.  As I said
earlier herein;  I'm very happy to discuss (anything ) with anybody,
but I don't appreciate it when what I say is taken out of context.

The subject of the thread was Ireland and this fool Castleshort.  (My
comment), thrown in, had to do with the status of Irish heraldy: which
Sean Murphy validated (thank youy again Sean), and Joseph McMillan, as
usual, had to jump in with a remark, not about the topic of thread,
but to challenge me - yet again.

What exactly did Murphy say to  validate you?

It would be extremely out of character for him to agree that heraldry
is an English imposition on Ireland.

Nick- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

ademdum:

I'm sure there are many who would argue that heraldry was too strongly
associated with the English to survive the fall of the monarchy.
However those people have never won an election in Ireland. Eamon de
Valera and Brian Cowen have. Valera created a Chief Herald for
Ireland, and even tried to create  a Republican version of the British
system of  armorial grants. Cowen is currently trying to fix mistakes
in Valera's legislation.

Right.  There was way too much English influence, and that was what I
was getting at, but you guys didn't seem to want to belive it.

I'm quite sure that heraldry in Ireland took on a very specific
character about it, however, the power to grant was strictly
controlled by the English.  Ireland proper as a sovereign does not
have the power to grant arms and that is fact coupled with the events
that Sean Murhpy et al have reported does nothing to pave the way for
the OCHI to have such granting powers.  Hence "the cloud".

As I said Nick, I'm actually very consistant and very good at arguing
a point.

On 27 Sep, 19:08, Greg <scoti... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:

On 26 Sep, 16:48, Nick B II <nicholas... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Sep 25, 8:19 pm, Greg <scoti... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:

Dude, you really suck at this.

Dude, that is the single dumbest thing you have ever said. Note the
preceding sentence was, by definition, not ad hominem because it did
not insult Greg the man, it insulted things Greg said. Or do I need to
translate ad hominem from the Latin?

Dude, you're not too good at following along.

Hey dude! Has rec.heraldry turned into the saloon of some crummy
Western?- Hide quoted text -

As has been said elsewhere, an ultra vires recognition of a title by an
office holder does not legitimate it, whether the official rescinds the
recognition later or not.  It is a nullity, and all acts that flow from it
are nullities as well.

"Graham" <gra... at (no spam) gmilne.demon.co.uk> wrote in message

news:f36933c5-7a81-4c48-81af-463af9b28d31 at (no spam) p23g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
On 17 Sep, 09:45, Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard <kurr... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:





On 16 Sep., 11:58, "gra... at (no spam) gmilne.demon.co.uk"

gra... at (no spam) gmilne.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 4 Sep, 18:06, Joseph McMillan <mcmillan... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Sep 4, 8:11 am, Sean J Murphy <sjbmur... at (no spam) SPAMOUTeircom.net> wrote
quoting Mr.Shortt:

'However, during the period he was the MacCarthy Mor and prior to
his
abdication and self-imposed exile ..."

Brilliant! Terence McCarthy/McCartney was never discredited at all;
he merely abdicated. So all the titles he granted are just as valid
as those of any other now-deposed monarch. Imagine such ingenuity
applied to worthwhile ends...the mind boggles.

Joseph McMillan

If the relevant heraldic authority, acting on behalf of the state and
within its powers, accepted these titles as valid in law then they are
valid in law. If the authorities got it wrong that is their problem;
people are entitled to rely on the state to get it right. There is a
parallel here in England with a writ of summons issued in error, which
was held to create a new peerage.
Congratulations, Baron Castleshort.

But with nobiliary titles, etc., not having any existence in the laws
of the Republic of Ireland, it is simply meaningless to say that a
recognition (erroneous or not) of Terence MacCarthy as the
representative of the MacCarthy Mor family should somehow endow the
titles invented by the latter as having any legal status. What the
then Chief Herald stated--perhaps not very wisely--was (IIRC) that he
had no objection to Terence MacCarthy "disposing" of any titles he
might have a claim to, but such a statement carries no legal weight
whatsoever in Irish law.

Best wishes,

Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't think this is correct. Unless titles are actually banned by
the constitution then the state is free to grant or recognize them.
So, unless otherwise banned, a title comes into existence by virtue of
the fact that it has been recognized by the state. You seem to coming
from the the viewpoint that nothing can be done unless it is
specifically approved. This is nonsense.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Sep 18, 1:07 am, "David E. Cohen" <david_e_co... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:





As has been said elsewhere, an ultra vires recognition of a title by an
office holder does not legitimate it, whether the official rescinds the
recognition later or not.  It is a nullity, and all acts that flow from it
are nullities as well.

"Graham" <gra... at (no spam) gmilne.demon.co.uk> wrote in message

news:f36933c5-7a81-4c48-81af-463af9b28d31 at (no spam) p23g2000vbl.googlegroups.com....
On 17 Sep, 09:45, Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard <kurr... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On 16 Sep., 11:58, "gra... at (no spam) gmilne.demon.co.uk"

gra... at (no spam) gmilne.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On 4 Sep, 18:06, Joseph McMillan <mcmillan... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:

On Sep 4, 8:11 am, Sean J Murphy <sjbmur... at (no spam) SPAMOUTeircom.net> wrote
quoting Mr.Shortt:

'However, during the period he was the MacCarthy Mor and prior to
his
abdication and self-imposed exile ..."

Brilliant! Terence McCarthy/McCartney was never discredited at all;
he merely abdicated. So all the titles he granted are just as valid
as those of any other now-deposed monarch. Imagine such ingenuity
applied to worthwhile ends...the mind boggles.

Joseph McMillan

If the relevant heraldic authority, acting on behalf of the state and
within its powers, accepted these titles as valid in law then they are
valid in law. If the authorities got it wrong that is their problem;
people are entitled to rely on the state to get it right. There is a
parallel here in England with a writ of summons issued in error, which
was held to create a new peerage.
Congratulations, Baron Castleshort.

But with nobiliary titles, etc., not having any existence in the laws
of the Republic of Ireland, it is simply meaningless to say that a
recognition (erroneous or not) of Terence MacCarthy as the
representative of the MacCarthy Mor family should somehow endow the
titles invented by the latter as having any legal status. What the
then Chief Herald stated--perhaps not very wisely--was (IIRC) that he
had no objection to Terence MacCarthy "disposing" of any titles he
might have a claim to, but such a statement carries no legal weight
whatsoever in Irish law.

Best wishes,

Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't think this is correct. Unless titles are actually banned by
the constitution then the state is free to grant or recognize them.
So, unless otherwise banned, a title comes into existence by virtue of
the fact that it has been recognized by the state. You seem to coming
from the the viewpoint that nothing can be done unless it is
specifically approved. This is nonsense.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It is difficult to understand why Sean Murphy is concerned about The
Nobiliary Fraternity of the Nia Naisc has no connection with Terence
MacCarthy and his “Order”, though I would be interested to know if his
brother Connor is continuing to run the “Order” as it was “given” to
him, he claims, by Terence before he left for Morocco. The NFNN gives
money to charities, and has enjoyed social events together. As I said
before, no officials take any money and pay expenses and any fees
themselves so it should not be of interest to any investigator. James
Short was a member of Terence MacCarthy’s “Order”, but has not been
invested as a member of the Nobiliary Fraternity, though he became a
member of my House many years ago, I have only seen him two or three
times in the past years, but he remains a member of my House. I do not
wish to become part of any debate about his past records, of which I
know nothing. I have observed him on duty in London with a team of
bodyguards, and I can verify his present occupation, and have seen him
leading the Gallowglass guards in the St Patrick’s Day Parade in
Atlanta Georgia
Charles McKerrell of Hillhouse- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It is difficult to understand why Sean Murphy is concerned about The
Nobiliary Fraternity of the Nia Naisc has no connection with Terence
MacCarthy and his “Order”, though I would be interested to know if his
brother Connor is continuing to run the “Order” as it was “given” to
him, he claims, by Terence before he left for Morocco. The NFNN gives
money to charities, and has enjoyed social events together. As I said
before, no officials take any money and pay expenses and any fees
themselves so it should not be of interest to any investigator. James
Short was a member of Terence MacCarthy’s “Order”, but has not been
invested as a member of the Nobiliary Fraternity, though he became a
member of my House many years ago, I have only seen him two or three
times in the past years, but he remains a member of my House. I do not
wish to become part of any debate about his past records, of which I
know nothing. I have observed him on duty in London with a team of
bodyguards, and I can verify his present occupation, and have seen him
leading the Gallowglass guards in the St Patrick’s Day Parade in
Atlanta Georgia
Charles McKerrell of Hillhouse