How-Many-Tmes-msg - 10/31/19

How many times do you need to swear fealty?

NOTE: See also the files: fealty-art, Fealty-n-t-SCA-art, fealty-msg, Squires-n-CMA-art, squires-msg, knighthood-msg, 2Squire-r-Not-art, 25-years-late-art.

************************************************************************
NOTICE -

This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday.

This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org

I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter.

The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors.

Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s).

Thank you,
    Mark S. Harris                  AKA:  THLord Stefan li Rous
                                          Stefan at florilegium.org
************************************************************************

Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 08:42:51 +1100
From: Greg Turkich <lochswan at gmail.com>
Subject: [Lochac] New Discussion - Fealty, How many times do you need/have to give it?
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

G'Day All,

Recently... at Crown invest in Polit, I had a discussion with a rather upset
peer, who was unable to get to the event in time to swear fealty. (No names,
no pack drill) That person felt that because they hadn't sworn fealty to our
current Crown that they were not in fealty and therefore had not fulfilled a
"perceived" obligation. After calming the peer, I got to thinking how many
other peers and for that matter members of Lochac feel this way or more to
the point have been taught this way.

I for one have always believed (and maybe I'm wrong here...wouldn't be the
first time!!) that I swore fealty when I was made a knight. That fealty was
to the Crown and was in effect till I left the SCA or died. I swear fealty
to the Crown each reign for two reason; 1/ because it's kinda neat and lets
people see that I support the Crown...especially the newbies and 2/ Because
I'm at the event.

The Crown of Lochac should always know that as a peer, I'm in fealty to
them. That oath has never been revoked by them or removed by me. So my
question is really; why do people feel that it is an obligation to swear
fealty every time... to the extent that some even send in fealty scrolls so
that they don't miss out? (I understand B&B's doing it and greater
Officers.)  Just something else to hash around and see what people think.

Lochswan


Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 11:06:04 +1100
From: Oz <bksiroze at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] New Discussion - Fealty, How many times do you
	need/have to give it?
To: The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list <lochac at lochac.sca.org>

Firstly I will state that I believe that this is something that is 
personal between the Crown and the Peer, and as a result different 
people will have a different view point and responses.

Going back years I was at a Rowany Festival, I believe my second one, 
and when the request was made in Court for the Peers to swear fealty, a 
Knight mumbles "that's my que" and walked off... I later learned the 
reasons behind that but at the time I was under the belief that a Knight 
_must_ swear fealty (what makes a Knight different from a Master). This 
led to a large amount of what the...? Especially coming from Ynys Fawr 
which is rather a small and isolated existence with in the SCA 
(especially way back then) We had no local Knights back then and they 
were a great and mythical thing that inpsired awe and respect simply by 
virtue of the fact they had a white belt, chain and spurs.

While I agree with Greg's sentiment that once Fealty is given to the 
Crown it is good for all time until revoked. I do make the effort to 
give myelf the oppurtunity to renew my fealty to every King and Queen, 
in person, at some time during Their reign. Draco and Asa were even 
gracious enough to take my fealty in a private moment after an event had 
finished because there was no oppurtunity for it to happen in Court.
It is something that I believe I am bound to do as a Knight, for me it's 
part of what a Knight is. I renew my fealty every reign because: I feel 
a duty to do so; as a show of support for the Crown; and as a spectacle 
for the populace. It is something that I feel strongly about, and yes I 
believe I would be upset having missed the oppurtunity to do so.

Just my view point
Oze.


Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 11:37:46 +1100
From: Steve Roylance <roylance at corplink.com.au>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] Fealty, How many times?
To: lochac at lochac.sca.org

On 30/01/11 11:14, Jenny Andersen wrote:
<<< Here's another question to ask - of those members of the populace who swore fealty to the crown at 12th Night just gone (which is the first time I've ever seen it done) why did you go up and do it?

Maeve >>>
at Coronation it was a swearing of homage not fealty for members of the 
populace.

The usual SCA oath of homage is an explicit statement of
populace - "You are our King and Queen"
K&Q - "We are the King and Queen see you as our people"

There is no obligations in the oaths exchanged

?orfinn
Hund Herald


Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 08:24:05 +1000
From: Braddon Giles <braddongiles at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] Fealty, How many times?
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

On 30 January 2011 10:14, Jenny Andersen <jla_mni at hotmail.com> wrote:
<<< Here's another question to ask - of those members of the populace who swore fealty to the crown at 12th Night just gone (which is the first time I've ever seen it done) why did you go up and do it?

Maeve >>>

Members of the populace were given the chance to offer "homage", not
fealty. I took it. I said "You are the Crown - don't kill me, please".
They said "We are the Crown - you may live." :) So far the only
respondant to this thread who has perceived the difference between
homage and fealty is Master Thorfinn. Technicalities matter.

Fealty is a two way honour commitment; homage is an expression of
loyalty. Knights, Greater Officers and Territorial Barons and
Baronesses are required to be in fealty to the Crown; other Peers may
choose to be in fealty. Nobody else is obliged to be in fealty. On the
other hand, anyone can offer their homage to the Crown.

While I was a Territorial Baron I had a reason to be in fealty. The
Crown promised to protect the people and the land. In return I raised
an army to serve at the Crown's disposal, and directed a cut of the
tax income to the Royal coffers. I was the Crown's direct
representative in St Florian de la Riviere, and the people's
representative to the Crown. Now that Sir Bain and Lady Bianca are the
B+B (Vivat!) I am a private citizen. I might enter into a two way
honour commitment with Sir Gabriel or Duena Constanzia as individuals
if that was what we both chose, but there is currently no reason for
the Crown to offer me It's fealty. I bring no army, I am not a Greater
Officer, I am not a Peer.

However, I can offer my homage to the Crown, and to the people who
wear the Crowns. So at 12th Night, I did.

Giles Leabrook.


Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 14:24:41 +1100
From: Sheridon Glenn <Sheridon.glenn at gmail.com>
Subject: [Lochac] Fealty
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

Great discussion thus far.  Here is my opinion....

If you are a Knight then you should swear fealty each reign when given the
chance.

  1. It is symbolic to everyone that you are accepting the responsibility
  (duty) that goes with your 'benifits' of being a Knight.  It shows the
  Kingdom that you are there for the crown should they need you AND it shows
  the Kingdom that you are there for them if they should need you.
  2. If there is a crown that you feel that may to harm to the Kingdom,
  then this is when your oath is needed the most.  You are saying you are
  there to support the reign but you also there to give council and minimize
  or avoid any damage that you think may come.  Knights that decide to take 6
  months off because they do not like the people on the throne in my opinion
  are leaving the Kingdom in the lurch.  Their actions are saying....good luck
  to everyone I will be back when the dust settles....and are leaving the
  innocent to defend for themselves.  Remember that whole "defend the
  innocent" part?
  3. My interpretation of the oath is that my fealty ends as each crown
  steps down and begins anew with each crown that steps up.  My interpretation
  has its roots in the fact that every kingdom in the known world has a part
  in their coronation ceremony where the Great Officers of state swear fealty
  at the start of each new reign.  It is the same for landed Barons and
  Baronesses as well.  So, if it were the case that the oath was for ever an
  always then why would an officer and landed Baronages need to 're-swear'
  with each crown?  In the end, it is about showing that the Officers and
  Baronages are there to support the crown and also be sort of a check and
  balance as it were for the crown on issues that may arise.  As you can see
  from my point 1 and 2 from above I extend this logic to Knights as well.

I have a similar opinion with other peers with regards to the second point.
While not required to swear fealty to the crown, I do think there is a duty
to stand firm in the face of the gathering storm.

Let me be clear, that I am not saying that we all need to be self righteous
and stand on our pedestal and cause a ruckus.  I mean to give council (often
in private) to try and provide information to the crown in key matters.
Sometimes there will be things that we let go through to the keeper because
it would cause more strife/harm to the Kingdom to publicly try and stop than
to simply mark all the pieces on the vase so it can more easily be put back
together after that reign is over.  :)

I agree with folks that said that fealty in the SCA is not blind
obedience....see my points above about being a check against the crown on
key issues.

Yes this is a game, but my word is still my word.

Just my opinion,

Siridean


Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 23:35:53 +1100
From: "Cary" <lenehan at our.net.au>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] Fealty
To: "'The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list'"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

Siridean wrote:
<<<  3. My interpretation of the oath is that my fealty ends as each crown
  steps down and begins anew with each crown that steps up.  My
interpretation has its roots in the fact that every kingdom in the known world has a part in their coronation ceremony where the Great Officers of state swear
fealty at the start of each new reign.  It is the same for landed Barons and Baronesses as well.  So, if it were the case that the oath was for ever an
  always then why would an officer and landed Baronages need to 're-swear'
  with each crown?  In the end, it is about showing that the Officers and
  Baronages are there to support the crown and also be sort of a check and
  balance as it were for the crown on issues that may arise.  As you can see
  from my point 1 and 2 from above I extend this logic to Knights as well. >>>

IMO The Fealty that you speak of (one of the types that is available in the
SCA) is, unless you have put some sort of condition in the oath that is
non-traditional, permanent both to the Kingdom and the idea or concept of
the Crown*.  It can be newly sworn to each incumbent who holds that post,
but even if you do not swear to the incumbent then you are still held to
permanent fealty to them by virtue of the office they hold.

We tend to re-swear when we are present as a public affirmation to the
populace.  There is a long discussion that can be had here about the use of
ritual to reinforce authority structures where we have a notional
rational-legal structure (or depending on kingdom) a traditional structure
when, in fact, all actual real authority that is wielded by the Crown is
pretty much of the charismatic form.  By respected individuals showing their
public alliegance they enhance this authority for those on the thrones and
'lend' some of the charismatic authority that they have accrued to Them.  By
not doing so when you are present you correspondlingly detract from it.

The comparison is easy to draw to the church (Christian) arguements over the
dual (or triple ) nature of God.  :-)

Hrolf

* Otherwise why go with 'Semper fidelis'?


Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:18:50 +1100
From: Paul Sleigh <bat at flurf.net>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] New Discussion - Fealty, How many times do you
	need/have to give it?
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

<<< Actually the Crown are the sovereign and consort. The crowns are some
nice jewelry, worn so we see the shorter Crowns in crowds. >>>

True enough, but I always understood it to mean that the Crown is
eternal, regardless of the person whom fate has arranged to carry it
around.  So I take "until the Crown depart Their Throne" to be
referring to this eternal, ageless concept of Crown; in particular, it
means that your fealty carries through from one Coronation to the
next, and only your death, the end of the world or *the loss of royal
power in some kind of major game-changing political disaster* can
"deactivate" it.  This interpretation appeals to me because it
prevents those who are in fealty being forced to support an "evil"
king and queen during some kind of upheaval.  If the king and queen
depart their throne, ie get booted out or make an illegal move, those
who are in fealty are not bound by their oath to go against their
consciences.  They can re-declare their loyalty whatever way they
choose, but their previous oaths don't hamstring them. I can't think
of a situation where that would be likely, but I like the idea that
it's being catered for, just in case.

I'm sure people with a better grasp than me will wade in with better
interpretations of that particular clause though.  It may just be the
most misunderstood or misrepresented of the entire ceremony.

: Bat :


Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 18:05:21 +1100
From: Greg Turkich <lochswan at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] New Discussion - Fealty, How many times do you
	need/have to give it?
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
	<lochac at lochac.sca.org>

Thanks Miles,

But I did mean what I said. I swore fealty to the Crown. The position of the
Crown is, in my view, eternal. The Kings and Queens change. The King and
Queen are custodians of the people. I see the Crown as the people of Lochac,
and it is all those that I am sworn to defend.

In Mundane life I have sworn real fealty to Her Majesty the Queen of
England, Her Heirs and Successors. Which to me means that I have sworn
fealty to the Crown and who ever, legitimately, occupies that position at
any one time. I may have to think hard about that if ever the "Rampart
Republicans" in Australia  try to seize power.

But in the SCA, I do the same. I'm in fealty to the Crown and I am the Kings
Man. As a side note I'm also the Queens man, due to another obligation that
dates back many years now.

Lochswan

<the end>
Edited by Mark S. Harris	How-Many-Tmes-msg 	4 of 6