home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
- Path: sparky!uunet!enterpoop.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!INTERNET!dont-send-mail-to-path-lines
- From: vader@meryl.csd.uu.se ("]ke Eldberg")
- Subject: Drachenwald Kingdom ideas
- Message-ID: <199301031829.AA23940@meryl.csd.uu.se>
- Sender: vader@csd.uu.se
- Organization: The Internet
- Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 18:29:39 GMT
- Lines: 69
-
- Greetings from William de Corbie!
-
- I wrote:
-
- >> that it becomes a real "ennoblement". Put it on the same level as
- >> today's kingdom "orders of high merit". Make AoA required for the
- >> display (not the registration) of arms. Fill out the holes (left by
-
- Gwenllian Cwmystwyth ferch Morfudd replied:
-
- >In this, you've recreated a stratification that the SCA has specificly
- >avoided. When I joined, I was told that all SCA folks are assumed to be
- >noble. All nobles may have and display armoury. As a herald, I'd
- >rather see a restriction that only registered armory be displayed.
-
- The SCA tradition is that all members are assumed to be 'of gentle birth'
- which is not quite the same as 'noble'. While I cannot define exactly
- what the difference between "gentle" and "noble" is, I think that the
- intention of the afrementioned tradition is to say that nobody in the
- SCA is forced to depict a lower-class person. There are no serfs here.
-
- I do not think that reserving the right to display heraldry for those
- with AoAs would create a bad social stratification, any more than re-
- serving the right to wear coronets or white belts or spurs does today.
- But if you are saying that you would not want heraldic privileges to
- become exclusive for a small elite group, I quite agree. It should be
- a not-too-difficult goal to attain for anyone who is active in the SCA.
- Perhaps "kingdom order level" is too high. But the AoA should certainly
- be given a greater importance than it has today.
-
-
- Gwenllian:
-
- >I know I should wait for Tibor before I open my mouth, but I was 95%
- >certain that Corpora specifies 2 reigns per year.
-
- If I am not misinformed, the West has always had 3 reigns per year.
- I have not found anything in the Organizational Handbook about the
- length of reigns.
-
-
- Gwenllian:
-
- >In rereading your missive for the quoter, I came up with a question that
- >might help define some of this. Why do you want to be in the SCA?
- >Seriously, I'm interested in your answer. So far as I can see, you
- >want to toss virtually the entire structure. What is the benefit to you
- >of conducting your medieval re-creations under the auspices of the SCA?
-
- I don't see it quite that way. Imagine going to an event in a Drachenwald
- where most of my suggestions have been implemented. Do you really think
- that you would not feel at home there? That you would not recognize this
- as SCA? I believe that you *would* feel at home. The fighters would still
- be going at each other with rattan. Lords and ladies from 600-1600 would
- still stroll around and talk courteously to each other. The King and
- Queen would still be on the thrones holding court. And so on. I think
- that the difference would be that it all felt a tad more medieval.
-
- I don't think that there are many people who join the SCA *because* it
- has 2 reigns per year, or because in SCA you can belong to 15 different
- "orders", or because of any of the other things I suggested that
- Drachenwald should change. They are not the essence of what the SCA is.
- The way I see it, my proposals retain the spirit and essence of the
- Society, while altering some non-essential structures in a direction
- better suited to the European mindset and also in the direction of
- authenticity.
-
- William
-
-