Good prey animals were ascribed positive characteristics-especially the stag, which was admired for its wisdom, strength, and noble spirit, meaning that its hunt required a higher degree of respect for the beast and conferred a great deal of prestige on its hunters. These rules extended beyond the human and into the animal world, delineating “good” prey (such as the stag and boar) from “bad” prey (such as the wolf and wildcat). ![]() Hunting by pursuit and killing at close quarters was placed above hunting with traps or bows, which were considered cowardly and improper methods for a man to use. These rules were innately hierarchical: there was a clear distinction in how the lord of the house and his guests should participate compared to their servants and gamekeepers, as well as guidelines for the less strenuous types of hunting noble ladies should be allowed to take part in. The Master of Game includes specifications for who was to be involved in a hunt, what sorts of tactics were acceptable, how different types of animals should be pursued, what types of dogs and birds of prey should be used in various scenarios, what qualities to look for in human and animal members of a hunting party, and many other nuances that defined the “proper” hunt. As well as The Book of Saint Albans, a number of other medieval manuscripts lay out these practices in eye-watering detail, including the early 15th century Master of the Game by Edward, second Duke of York 1. While the common folk hunted largely for sustenance, using the easiest means available, the aristocratic hunt was surrounded by highly developed sets of rules and customs that had steadily grown in complexity and importance over the preceding centuries. Hunting, in particular, was a hugely important mode of social engagement for the medieval upper class, and almost every person of noble status would have participated. A sort of one-stop-shop guide for medieval gentlemen, the Book contains information about hunting, hawking, and heraldry, matters that were considered essential knowledge for any aristocratic man of the day. Hooks’ paper cites numerous medieval manuscripts, but the majority of his collective nouns can be found in one particular work, The Book of Saint Albans, which was printed in 1486 but compiles knowledge and essays from several earlier sources. ![]() To answer these questions, we can start by looking at the sources where these collective nouns were found. With so many terms listed, and so many oddly specific and seemingly ironic ones at that, it is hardly unreasonable to wonder how all of these curious words came about, and indeed whether medieval English people would actually refer to a “discretion” of priests or a “worthlessness” of jugglers in casual conversation. I can’t recommend enough that you read the full list, which its compiler describes as “practically useless and academically curious”: there are a few hundred collective nouns in there and nowhere near the space here to share all the good ones.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |