SCA-hist4-msg - 1/28/12

 

Messages on the history of the SCA from 9/1994 to 12/2000.

 

NOTE: See also the files: SCA-hist1-msg, SCA-hist2-msg, SCA-hist3-msg, SCA-stories1-msg, SCA-romance-msg, Hst-SCA-Fence-art, you-know-msg, SCA-in-books-msg.

 

************************************************************************

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

************************************************************************

 

"History is a moving target that changes as fresh details are discovered, as errors are corrected, as popular attitudes shift.  Historians carve the sculpture that is Truth not out of granite, but out of wet clay."

 

-   From the preface to "The Life of Muad'Dib" in the Dune series.

-----

 

Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 10:19:32 -0600

From: "Decker, Terry D." <TerryD at Health.State.OK.US>

Subject: RE: SC - New Laurel on our List!!!

 

Here is what the glossary of SCA terms has to say about the Order of the

Rose:

 

Rose, Order of the -- This award was granted to those who had reigned as

Queen of Love and Beauty (and later, simply as Queen) to give them equal

rank with those who had reigned as King. Historical Note: In the very early

days of the SCA, if a fighter was not a Knight and they won the Crown

Tournament, they were offered Knighthood. The Order of the Rose was created

to give an equivalent title, as Countess (and Duchess) did not exist at the

time. This was first granted at Twelfth Night, AS II (January 6, 1968) by

[King] William the Silent, and was backdated for those who had reigned up

until that point as Queen. In the West Kingdom, membership in the Order of

the Rose is automatic (this is not the case in all Kingdoms of the SCA) --

when a former Queen is recognized as a Countess, they are also admitted to

the Order of the Rose. Note that members of the Order of the Rose are

equivalent in rank to the members of the Orders of Chivalry, the Laurel and

the Pelican. However, most people do not think of the Order of the Rose as a

peerage level award, as the recipient is also becoming a Countess at the

same time, which outranks the other non-royal peerages, as the title is that

of a Royal Peer.

 

Bear

 

 

Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 12:33:13 -0800

From: Susan Fox-Davis <selene at earthlink.net>

Subject: Re: SC - Ladies of the Rose

 

Gunter wrote:

> Something to remember about the LoR is that it isn't

> even a Peerage in all Kingdoms. In Ansteorra it is more

> of a courtesy title than a Peerage. I think mainly because

> we feel, as has been mentioned, that the rank of Countess

> or Duchess is higher than simple Peerage.

> I believe most Principalities have similar awards for

> Princesses who step down but they are not Peerage either.

 

In West and traditionally-related kingdoms, Viscountesses are Ladies of the Rose

as well.

 

> Also, Duke Hector is considered a "Lord of the Rose" and

> actually goes up when the Ladies are called to protect the

> Queen's Crown.

 

I think the first male in the Order of the Rose was Duke William of Houghton,

lord husband of then-Princess-in-her-own-damright of the Mists, Maythen of

Elfhaven, in 1981.  O but he had a grand time, being the Lord of Love and Beauty

with his Laddies in Lurking.  I never saw him stop smiling during their visit to

Caid's May Coronation.

 

In Caid there is one unbelted Duke.  Don't ask.  His lady is a member of the

Order of the Rose and a peer, all righty, but he ain't nothing but a Duke [and

still banished the last time I checked.  Don't ask.  I wasn't there.]

 

Selene

selene at earthlink.net

 

 

From: Marc Carlson [marccarlson20 at hotmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 4:25 PM

To: ansteorra at ansteorra.org

Subject: [Ansteorra] 1 May 37 AS

 

I believe (and all the official documents seem to back this up) the Party

began year 1 (or would have had they been counting  the years at that time -

the formal AS system started IIRC AS 3 or so).  Therefore this is the first

day of the new year, AS 37.

 

====================================

 

Some years ago I started doing historical research on a number of things -

some of this research has been seen before, some has not.  Since A lot of

the stuff I was doing on the history of the SCA was being done elsewhere, I

set it aside (so little time, so much to study).  However there were a few

details that you might find interesting:

 

The Flyer:

 

Be it known to all who may be lovers of Chivalry

that there will be held on the first of May 12:00 to 6:00 pm

an International Tournament -- for that it is Spring.

 

All knights are summoned to defend in single combat the claims of

their ladies to the title of fairest, signified by the crown which will

be awarded to him who the judges deem fights most bravely.  And for

the increase of joy to both them who fight and they who watch, there will be

both singing, and dance.

 

(please reply):

 

2219 Oregon St.,

Berkeley, Calif.

845-4340

 

All guests are encouraged to wear the of some age

of Christendom, Outre-Mer, or Faerie, in which swords were used.

 

===================================

 

The list is not complete, but it's those who were known to have been there.

 

Mundane/SKA                 At the party and/or what happened to them later.

 

?/???                ???, Siegfried von Hoflichskeit's date

 

?/???                        Nathan Retarius

 

Judy/???               ???, Diana's Roomate; Now a cloistered nun.

 

Anderson, Astrid/Astrid of Hawk Ridge  Countess

                              Queen Lucy of Narnia; Now Astrid Bear

 

Barnhart, Richard/Aegineous/Richard the Short/Richard of Mont Real

                              Duke, King 1.1   Sir Aeginius

 

Bradley, David/Ardral Argo verKaeysc

                              1st Knight   David the Herald

 

Braude, Nan/???             ???, Diana's Roomate

 

Breen, Marion Zimmer Bradley/Elfrid/Elflaeda of Greewalls Mistress

                              Dona Ximena; deceased

 

Breen, Walter/Walter of Greenwalls       hairy hermit wild; deceased

 

de Maiffe, Ken/Fulke de Wyvern Duke            Sir Kenneth Dottery,

 

Janet/???   ???, Later Bigglestone, later Winter; now Sloan Friedlander,

 

Howard/Bo of York                  ???

 

Henderson, Steven/Steven MacEannruig Sir               Sir Henderson

 

Hodghead, Beverly/Beverly Hodghead Master Beverly Hodghead,

                 singer?; deceased; 1st Laurel (or 2d depending on who's telling the story)

 

Hodghead,

David/David of Ilwheirlane                 David Hodghead

 

Hodghead, Ellen Ellen Hodghead

 

Hodghead, Marynel/Marynel of Darkhaven Duchess, Queen 1.1

 

                                                  Marynel Hodghead

 

Hollander, Frederick/Frederick of Holland Duke Sir Frederick of Holland

 

Jacks, Jerry/Israel ben Jacob           Lord Mediocrates of Hellas; Deceased

 

Maxam, Benjy/???                          ???

 

Maxam, Joe/???                             ???

 

Meskys, Ed/???                             ???

 

Olsgaard, Henrick/Henrick of Havn Duke Sir Henrick the Dane

 

Paxson, Diana/Diana Listmaker Mistress           ??? (The Hostess)

 

Perrin, Steve/Stefan de Lorraine               ???

 

Pope, Elizabeth, Dr./no SCA persona; of Mills College     Deceased

(notable for, among other things, the first criticism of SCA costuming by a knowledgable source)

 

Reed, Carolyn/Mary of Tamar Duchess            Mary

 

Rolfe, Benjy                               gafiated

 

Rolfe, Joe                                         gafiated

 

Rolfe, Felice/Felice of Mahem House       Lady of Galadriel's Court;

                                         Felice Maxam;  gafiated

 

Studebaker, Don/Jon De Cles', The Red Baron Baron   ???,

                       Eventually married Paxon

 

Thewlis, David/Siegfried von Hoflichskeit Duke      ???

 

Titcomb, Molly/Mariana Silversea           Eowyn of Rohan; Diana's Roomate

 

Wolfgangel, Paul/???              1st King/Sir Deutsche Bursenschaft

 

[This gentleman won the first tourney, and apparently vanished. So

   Sir Richard the Short, and his lady Marynel were selected to replace them]

 

Zimmer, Paul Edwin/???                      Edwin Bersaerk; deceased

 

?/???                            1st Queen/???, a simple peasant maid

 

Anderson, Poul/Bela of Eastmarch Sir   - latecomer/???, Deceased

 

Bigglestone, Clint/Harold Breakstone   - latecomer/???, Deceased

 

Zimmer, ?/Ann Parkhurst of Gatehouse    ???, Mother of Edwin Zimmer and MZB

 

 

Other early names who are frequently assumed to have been there but weren't

at the party:

 

Anderson, Karen/Karina of the Far West Mistress

 

Garett, Randall/Randall of Hightower Lord   Heraldic Founder; Deceased

 

Kurtz, Katherine/Bevan Frazier of Sterling Countess

 

Parker, Glen/Glyn ap Roodri Earl, Sir  (Professional Football Player)

 

Porter, Paul/Paul of Bellatrix Sir

 

Pournelle, Jerry/Jerome McKenna ??

 

Trimble, Bjo/Flavia Beatrice Carmigniani; Bjo of Griffin

 

Trimble, John/John ap Griffin

 

Caradoc ap Cador

 

Broxon, William

 

Broxon, Mildred Downey

 

Scithers, George

 

 

Subject: Group name/device history

Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 23:55:32 +0000

From: "K Francis"<baronesskay at hotmail.com>

To: "Mark.S Harris"<Mark.s.Harris at motorola.com>

 

I love to see ways to preserve our history.  In case you don't already have

it, here is what I know about my local group.

 

Back in AS I or so, there was a letter in the very early version of the Page

(West Kingdom newsletter, courtesy of Duke Henrik of Havn who has ORIGINAL

copies in a binder) about forming a Province of the North Bay, Province of

the East Bay and Province of the South Bay, effectively dividing up the

known world (greater bay area) at that time.  Eventually the North Bay

(Marin and Sonoma Counties) became the Province of Caldarium and sometimes

known as the Land beyond the Rainbow.  Marin County at the time was well

known for its hot tubs and peacock feathers, and the tunnels at the north

end of the Golden Gate Bridge have rainbows painted on them.  So, the device

is Or, a laural wreath on a wood tub between two peacock feathers crossed in

base, proper.  Great fun!  And our badge is two rainbows issuant from clouds

forming a circle.  The Province split off the Shire of Wolfscairn (Sonoma

Co.) and we have recently been reduced to a Shire ourselves due to lack of

membership numbers.

 

The East Bay became the Province of the Mists and the South Bay became the

Province of Southern Shores, both still going strong.

 

In Service,

 

Baroness Kay the Innocent of BelAnjou, OP

Kingdom of the West

Principality of the Mists

Shire of Caldarium

 

 

From: peerlady at hotmail.com

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: What we call ourselves

Date: 20 Aug 2003 09:27:36 -0700

 

> On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 22:23:05 +0000 (UTC), clevin at ripco.com (Craig

> Levin) wrote:

 

>OTOH, I've heard of Marklanders

>calling us Scathians, putting SCAdian into a sort of Old Icelandic

>guise.

 

   Perhaps someone else has already mentioned this, but just in case

... it was Marklanders who came up with the term "Scadian", a play on

"Scanian", from Scania, a Danish-speaking region of what is now

southern Sweden, but in SCA period was Danish territory.

 

   The pronunciation "skah" for SCA was originated by Mike Toman in

the early 70s at Michigan State University (Barony of the Northwoods).

Mike was alternately distressed and amused that just about all his

friends were sucked into the SCA, and took to calling it "SCA [skah]

-- The Thing That Would Not Die." (Properly said with bad monster

movie intonation.) "Skah" is still primarily a Middle Kingdom usage.

 

   Cheers!

 

-- Signy

 

 

From: Dyan Ford <dyanford at txucom.net>

Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003  11:44:42 PM US/Central

To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at ansteorra.org>

Subject: [Ansteorra] Re: Fossil memories

 

>>>So, considering how thinly the SCA was spread in AS VI, how did you hear of the SCA?

What do you see as having changed the most since then? What stands out the most in your memories of the SCA in the last thirty years?

Stefan<<<<

 

Oh Boy,  what a set of questions!  Let's see how I can answer....

 

First, I 'heard of the SCA in college, in the back of the book 'The Broken Sword' by Poul Anderson <sigh>.  From what I recall, it mentioned a group of people who spent their summer vacations near Chicago, playing 'medieval'.  I remember telling my roommate than I was going as soon as I got out of school & got a job -- that was in 1969.  (I _still_ have yet to attend Pensic!)

 

In 1972, I decided that if I couldn't get to Chicago, I'd try to find like-minded folk in the Houston area.  So, I hand-lettered a 'recruitment' poster & posted it at a local Comics Convention.  An old friend, JL3, saw it & asked why didn't I just join the group that was already in Houston.  I almost freaked, demanding more info.  He said that a group had formed some months earlier but had only 3 three people.  He offered to make some calls & see about setting up a meeting -- which he did.  We all met on the next Sunday to try to restart the Barony, 7 in person & 2 by proxy.

 

And since the group (then known only as 'The Barony in Houston') needed a name, we proceeded to debate possibilities.  In those days, groups were often named for a predominant local landmark.  Well, we sure didn't want the Bayou Barony!  So I thought of NASA and suggested 'StarGate' because a reporter had earlier dubbed Houston as the Gateway to the Stars.... everyone seemed to like it so the name stuck.  The device became a nine pointed star with 3 greater points for the original founders & 6 smaller points for the rest of us -- and 1 point was 'supposed' to be a 'binary' because JL3 was the only married founder (at the time) & we wanted to include his Lady (which she now denies --- hey, that's how _I_ remember it! )

 

As to how has it changed..... oh, there are not words to properly describe the differences!  I mean, this was years before the Texas RenFaire, & we _lived_ the joke of "Are you in a Play?".  No one took us seriously and communications with others in the SCA just didn't exist -- the nearest groups were Draconia (Baton Rouge, LA) to the East and the Atenveldt Barony/Kingdom (Tempe, AZ) to the West.  In those days, there were only 4 Kingdoms & Atenveldt extended from the southern Atlantic States across to the border of California.  I remember how we struggled to find references and information about historical practices.  We truly did 'wing it' and things were accepted for the 'effort' involved in the making, not the 'historical accuracy' that is demanded today.   The Dream was almost a tangible thing in those days & anyone who even made the attempt was welcome to play.  I truly miss some of that 'tolerance'.

 

As to the most 'Memoriables' ... I'm afraid I'll have to put that into an article or something.  The email would be much too long!  And this email has become too long also!  Thank you for your patience.

 

Shanahan the Fey, MLA, OLA, OMS, Starholder

 

 

From: Steve Mesnick <steffan at pobox.com>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Pennsic I Legend

Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:57:05 GMT

 

>>One practical way to do it would be to have a non-war-point

>>battle at Pennsic (or Estrella) where the winner of the last

>>Pennsic leads the Orient (EK-derived kingdoms) against the

>>Occident (WK-derived kingdoms).

>

> And how do you fit Meridies and Trimaris into that categorization?

 

There is evidence that what-eventually-became-Meridies was,

early on, considered to be "under the umbrella" of the East.

When I was Brigantia Herald in the early '80's, there was in

my files an inexplicable set of early chronicles of events in

Wyvernwood. That's in Florida. Turns out they reported to New

York, and my predecessor (Alfgar, I think it must have been)

dutifully kept the correspondence.

 

When I speak of Oriental and Occidental Rite in SCA

Inter-Kingdom Anthropology, I break it down this way:

 

The Occident:

WEST <- ATENVELDT <- MERIDIES  <- TRIMARIS

                  <- ANSTEORRA

                 <- OUTLANDS

                  <- ARTEMISIA

     <- CAID

     <- AN TIR

     <- LOCHAC

 

The Orient:

EAST <- MIDDLE <- CALONTIR

               <- EALDORMERE

     <- ATLANTIA

     <- DRACHENWALD

     <- AETHELMEARC

 

Of course, Atenveldt separated from the West so long ago that

that branch is considered independent by some, and I've heard

Atenveldt and her daughters referred to in terms of "the Atenveldt

Heresy". Some claim that Trimaris is more Oriental than its roots

would imply, due to geography. But I'll leave that for you Trimarians.

 

Still, based on the breakdown above, that would be one glorious

battle....

 

        Steffan

 

 

Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:54:38 -0500

From: "JAMES REVELLS" <sudnserv5 at verizon.net>

Subject: [Sca-cooks] OT:  RIP an SCA Legend

To: <SCA-HUMOR at yahoogroups.com>, <sca-east at indra.com>,

        <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

Cc: carolingia at indra.com, sca_merchants at yahoogroups.com

 

I have just been informed of the passing of Aonghais Dubh McTarb (MKA

Paul Serio) in a Florida prison of heart disease on Saturday, 21 February

2004. The family of Countess Arastorm the Golden was informed by the prison

Chaplin. It was also stated that the Chaplin had been unable to contact his

daughter Katherine, and his ex-wife, Mary Taran of Glastonbury.  Please be

caring in approaching any of his family that have not been informed.

 

Olaf of Trollhiemsfjord

 

 

From: Jay Rudin <rudin at ev1.net>

Date: May 8, 2004 3:39:38 PM CDT

To: "Ansteorra at Ansteorra.org" <ansteorra at ansteorra.org>

Subject: [Ansteorra] Re: Protocol Question (Warning: Can of Worms)>

 

Snorri asked:

> The only reference I found for this form of address is from the Society

> Corpora, which gives the official title/address of a GoA as

> "Lord/Lady."

> So my question is: where did the Honorable Lord/Lady and His/Her Lordship

> come from, and under what authority save for tradition are we using it?

 

Well, first of all, what authority except for tradition makes us care about

Ansteorra at all?  Tradition is much stronger than mere law in

Ansteorra.

 

A lot of this is memories from over twenty years ago, so the details

may not be exact.  But they're generally right.

 

When I first joined, the only title for an Award or Grant was "Lord / Lady".

(Of course, when I joined, we had just settled on the name "dirt" for this

stuff on the ground.)  We were the Principality of Ansteorra, in the kingdom

of Atenveldt, which had once spread from Florida to Idaho, and was founded

with very little knowledge of the SCA's traditions.  (The SCA's traditions

can be roughly broken down into Western Rite, Eastern Orthodox, and the

Atenveldt heresy.)

 

Atenveldt decided that Grants would have the right to be Lord / Lady

<surname>. Thus, if Snorri would, at that time, be Snorri, Lord Hallsson.

All Atenveldters, including the Ansteorrans, knew that this was their

right.

 

Not that it mattered much.  Grants were very rarely given out, except to

kingdom officers who weren't peers or nobles.  Mostly it was used by peers,

such as Master Lloyd, Lord von Eaker, or Sir Ton Lord Traveller.

 

This was, of course, illegal, and eventually got noticed.  Why is it

illegal? Well, Lord von Eaker and Lord Traveller are no problem, but if

Galen of Bristol was called Galen Lord Bristol, then that is a claim that he

rules the city of Bristol.

 

So the Laurel King of Arms, Master Wilhelm von Schlussel, ruled that it was

an unacceptable usage, in the very early 1980s, when Ansteorra was a baby

kingdom. This didn't affect people most places, because there were very few

people whose precedence came from a Grant of Arms.

 

Except in Ansteorra.  In the second reign, King Lloyd (von Eaker) elevated

the Star and Iris to Grant-level awards, and re-wrote the principality Order

of the Cavaliers of the SCA into the grant-level White Scarf of Ansteorra.

These were the first grant-level Orders, and the growing number of

members meant a lot of Grant-level people.

 

No problem for the White Scarves.  They had been called "Don / Dona" since

the principality Order, and kept doing so even after the Laurel King of Arms

ruled that that title was reserved to knights.  The constitution said, not

that they had the right to the title "Don", but they it would be recognized

tradition in Ansteorra to call them so.

 

(What's the difference?  Well, if the king says that all Stars of Merit will

be called "Chuckles":, then we, being good and loyal Ansteorran subjects,

will call him Chuckles Snorri.  That doesn't make "Chuckles" a title.)

 

But that leaves us with the Irises and Stars.  Since no king told us to call

them "chuckles", what do we call them?  Aureliane (the first Star Principal

Herald) proposed the honorific "Honorable Lord / Lady", and the form of

address "Your Ladyship / Lordship".  These were deemed acceptable, though

neither one is a title.  Your refer to him as the Honorable Lord Snorri, and

call him "Your Lordship", but you never (properly) say "His Lordship Snorri"

and his title is "Lord".

 

(By the way, the objection to "Your Lordship / Ladyship" is that is was

almost universally used only in the upward direction.  The servant addresses

the manor lord that way; the manor lord addresses the local baron, etc.)

 

Since then, the title Don / Dona has been recognized as equivalent to Lord

or Lady,  Therefore, it is the proper title for White Scarves, and the

Ansteorran tradition is that Italian and Spanish AoAs and GoAs don't use it

unless they have White Scarves.  (Yes, they have the right to, just as

everybody has the right to wear a red belt.  But we tend to choose not to

annoy the Dons, just as we choose not to annoy the squires.)

 

So what about "Centurion"?  That's Latin for "chuckles".

 

His Lordship the Honorable Lord Don Centurion Chuckles Robin of Gilwell

 

 

Date: Tu, 1 Jul 2004 23:58:28 -0700 (PDT)

From: Huette von Ahrens <ahrenshav at yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] An Invitation, Etc.

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

 

--- Stefan li Rous <StefanliRous at austin.rr.com> wrote:

> Hmmm. Anyone know if anyone has been offered a Peerage, but had the

> offer withdrawn before it actually happened?

> Stefan

 

Yes. Candidate, in planning the ceremony, ticked

off the Royals so badly that they withdrew the

offer. It turned out to be a complete

miscommunication, but another pair of Royals did

the deed six months later.  And, no, I will never

divulge names, dates or places, even off-list.

 

Huette

 

 

Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2004 10:14:02 -0400

Fom: "Terri Morgan" <nothingbutadame at inthe.sca.org>

Subject: [Sca-cooks] Re: Sca-cooks Digest, Vol 14, Issue 4

To: <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

 

> Hmmm. Anyone know if anyone has been offered a Peerage, but

> had the offer withdrawn before it actually happened?

> Stefan

 

Unfortunately, it happened to a friend of mine with no explanation given,

the ceremony jus didn't happen on the date originally set and then never

happened. We try not to talk about it.

 

Hrothny

 

 

From: Heather Rose Jones <heather.jones at earthlink.net>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: "Dead Rabbits" at War

Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 01:22:36 GMT

 

Cynthia Gee wrote:

> "Mark S. Harris" <stefanlirous at austin.rr.com> wrote in message

>> Steve Mesnick <steffan at pobox.com> wrote:

>> 

>>>Viscount Edward said:

>>> >>The name has failed miserably I admit and will be changed to the

>>>>>Volunteer Co-Ordination Office for future Pennsics.

>>> 

>>>ARVAL SAID:

>>> 

>>>>If you're going to change the name, it might be nice to try to find a

>>>>reasonably medieval name that fits the bill.  If you think there's any

>>>>chance that could happen, I'll help.

>>> 

>>>I SAY:

>>>ME TOO!!! I have been decrying the mundanification of SCA office

>>>names and institutions for years, and it really came to a head this

>>>year at Pennsic.

>> 

>>Well, how about we get rid of "Troll" since we are not a fantasy

>>organisation and go with "Gate"?

 

> Personally, I like the idea of saying Troll. It's an SCA tradition that goes

> right back to our founding. Remember where we came from.

 

To the best of my knowledge, nobody was using "troll" for

gate at our founding.  So clearly it's a johnny-come-lately

innovation that we should ditch in the name of tradition.

 

Tangwystyl

--

Heather Rose Jones

heather.jones at earthlink.net

 

 

From: Steve Mesnick <steffan at pobox.com>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Why Corpora?

Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:39:09 -0400

 

This is a weird question, maybe, but here goes. I've

been in the SCA for, oh, 27 years now and I've never

quite gotten a full answer.

 

Why are the primary governing documents of the SCA

called "The Corpora"?

 

Yes, I know about "the body of laws" or the

"body of precedents" or "the body of decisions". Is

that part of the story? But, in any case, "body" in Latin

is "corpus": "corpora" is plural. I could understand if the

thing were called "Corpus Legum" or somesuch....

 

What I'm looking for is history: who decided to call

this document "Corpora", and why. I'd be very interested

to hear from Someone Who Was There.

 

--- Steffan ap Kennydd

 

 

Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 13:14:03 -0400

From: Cynthia Virtue <cvirtue at thibault.org>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Why Corpora? (theory)

 

Steve Mesnick wrote:

> Yes, I know about "the body of laws" or the

> "body of precedents" or "the body of decisions". Is

> that part of the story? But, in any case, "body" in Latin

> is "corpus": "corpora" is plural. I could understand if the

> thing were called "Corpus Legum" or somesuch....

 

Back when I started paying attention to such things, it seemed very

clear that there were several different documents in Corpora, so it

would make sense to use the plural.  However, you may need an SCA

historian to say if this was really the case.

 

Now that they're bundling everything under "governing documents" it does

seem less like many different "bodies."

 

cv

 

 

From: "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott at csuohio.edu>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Why Corpora? (theory)

Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:47:33 -0400

 

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 13:14:03 -0400, Cynthia Virtue

<cvirtue at thibault.org> wrote:

> Steve Mesnick wrote:

 

>> Yes, I know about "the body of laws" or the

>> "body of precedents" or "the body of decisions". Is

>> that part of the story? But, in any case, "body" in Latin

>> is "corpus": "corpora" is plural. I could understand if the

>> thing were called "Corpus Legum" or somesuch....

 

> Back when I started paying attention to such things, it seemed very

> clear that there were several different documents in Corpora, so it

> would make sense to use the plural.  

 

Not really: one speaks of the corpus ('body') of someone's

work, meaning all of his works collectively.  'Corpora'

implies that there are not just several documents, but

several collections of documents.

 

[...]

 

Talan

 

 

From: James Pratt <cathal at mindspring.com>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Why Corpora?

Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 14:15:21 GMT

 

>What I'm looking for is history: who decided to call

>this document "Corpora", and why. I'd be very interested

>to hear from Someone Who Was There.

>--- Steffan ap Kennydd

 

The first volume of +CORPORA+ published in 1971 has the following

entries:

 

(p.2) "The Corpora being a body of decisions and rulings made by the

Board of Directors of the Society for Creative Anachronism,

Incorporated, for use by the said Board of Directors, the Officers of

said corperation (sic) those to whom they may delegate authority, and

any and all who may have reason to have dealings with the said

Corperation (sic),,,"

 

(p.3.) "...It is the decision of the Board of Directors of the Society

for Creative Anachronism, Inc, to excerpt its specific decisions and

rulings of such nature that they may alleviate the above mentioned

problems and post them in a small edition under the title "The

Corpora".

 

These two paragraphs give the answer to one question, i,e, who chose

the title, and that is the Board of Directors.  Exactly who proposed

it is not known; however the BoD itself assumed the authority and

credit of the action.

 

The actual origin of the name may be a bit more difficult to construe.

It could be an extension of an actual dilemma found all too often in

period works themselves: bad Latin.   The rendering of Latin nouns in

Medieval texts could assume some truly astounding endings and that is

in this case, dare I say it, creatively anachronistic.

 

However I prefer to give more credit to the erudition of the Founders,

and submit that the second paragraph cited above _may_ offer a clue to

the origin of the use of CORPORA rather than the normal "corpus" for

the term 'body'.  

The paragraph from page (3) specifically mentions that the publication

will be in a 'small edition'.  I vaguely recall that the addition of

the ending 'a' to some nouns taking different endings could

indicate a diminuative or 'pet' usage.  Hence 'corpora' could be

offered as meaning a 'small body/edition' of the decisions of the

Board.

 

Cathal.

 

 

From: Charlene Charette <neitherhere at northere.com>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Dumb Question

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 04:46:13 GMT

 

Arval wrote:

> It's not clear from this that the "honorable" usages were approved by

> the Board: The Board approved his proposal regarding patents for royal

> peers; but the rest of this paragraph just reports a set of additional

> proposals presented for discussion.  Master Wilhelm had an unfortunate

> tendency to overstep his authority in matters like these, so I'd want

> to see the Board minutes before drawing any conclusions.

 

The old BOD minutes are at:

http://www.sca.org/BOD/minutes/

 

I have a vague recollection of this when I typed it up, but I haven't

the time right now to go looking for it.

 

--Perronnelle

 

 

From: Chris Zakes <moondrgn at earthlink.net>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: "KIssing up"

Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 23:38:12 GMT

 

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:31:33 GMT,  an orbital mind-control laser

caused Charly the Bastard <nitecrawler7 at worldnet.att.net> to write:

 

(snippage)

 

>PS there weren't 'authorizations' back then. There weren't even waivers.

 

While you're correct that there weren't authorizations "back then" (at

least in the part of Atenveldt that eventually became Ansteorra--I

think some other kingdoms *did* have them) we've been signing waivers

since *at least* AS 9, when I joined.

 

       -Tivar Moondragon

               Ansteorra

 

 

From: Stephen <stephen at invalid.verso.org>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Questions about Chisels

Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:27:04 +1300

 

> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

>> Somebody else

>> (don't even know the name) got his for photography.  (Living in

>> Caid when it was still part of the West.)

 

Anthony J. Bryant wrote:

> You've got to be kidding about that. Please tell me you're kidding.

 

I've even corresponded with a lady who claimed to be that Laurel!

 

As far as I recall, she received her laurel in the days when there were

no Pelicans, and the implication I got was that she'd done a lot of

service for the kingdom, and Powers That Be wanted to recognize that,

and the thing they came up with was photography.

 

But I've never actually met the person, so it's mostly hearsay.

 

Ulf

Quarterly Gules and Argent

Dartonshire, Lochac

 

 

From: Stephen <stephen at invalid.verso.org>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Questions about Chisels

Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:34:39 +1300

 

> But I've never actually met the person, so it's mostly hearsay.

 

From http://www.sca-caid.org/laurels/Joan.htm

 

Mistress Joan of Crawfordsmuir

Photography and Cooking

Elevated April 29, l978

By Terrence and Allisandra

King and Queen of the West

 

Ulf

Quarterly Gules and Argent

Dartonshire, Lochac

 

 

From: "sclark55 at rogers.com" <sclark55 at rogers.com>

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Activities for a small shire

Date: 3 Apr 2005 14:56:26 -0700

 

> > Maybe someone here can pipe up with an authoritative history and how

> > the SCA picked it up.  (I've played a non-armored touch version.)

 

http://www.bootsnall.com/cgi-bin/gt/travelstories/me/aug01buzkashi.shtml

 

> Here's a basic explanation on how the original game works, and it's name,

> buzkashi or bozkashi. How SCA took it up and modified it, I don't know.

 

As far as I know, SCA Bouzhkashi was devised by Duke Finvarr de Taahe

and Baron Torbin of Amberhall sometime in the late 70s-early 80s.  You

can read an article about it written by Finvarr in TI #102, from 1992.

 

Incidentally, if you read the article, you'll find out about Murphy,

the original bouzhkashi sheep.  Murphy is now retired, but is the

official Canton of Eoforwic mascot.  He currently resides in my

basement.

 

Nicolaa

 

 

Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:52:11 -0500

From: "Terry Decker" <t.d.decker at worldnet.att.net>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] RE:  time was: "Trial By Fire" Ad

To: "Cooks within the SCA" <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

 

> <<< In theory,anyway, we're an educational organization learning and

> studying about the historical period prior to Dec 1, 1600.>>

> *Prior to 17th century which starts January 1,1601.

> There are those Kingdoms that have members that do Cavalier or periods up to

> 1650. Why 1650? I do not know, only that I am told that that is as far as

> SCA folks are willing to tolerate out of SCA period. Ten years ago the

> tolerance date stopped around 1605, maybe someone got dyslectic with the

> date.

> Lyse

 

In the early days of the SCA, one of the widely used publications (Queen

Carole's Guide, I think) used 1650 as the cut off date rather than the

"pre-17th Century" stated in Corpora.  1650 became the "generally accepted"

but incorrect end date.

 

Bear

 

 

Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 16:36:20 -0700

From: "K C Francis" <katiracook at hotmail.com>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Pennsic Article - West Kingdom History Site

To: sca-cooks at ansteorra.org

 

The West Kingdom has a History site with pictures and event descriptions of

as many events (from the beginning) as possible.  Here are the memories of

those who were there starting with what led up to the first event.

 

http://history.westkingdom.org/Year0/index.htm

 

click on [year 1] to check out the flyer for that first event and  

pictures.

 

Katira al-Maghrebiyya

 

 

From: Marc Carlson <marccarlson20 at hotmail.com>

Date: November 9, 2005 12:53:08 PM CST

To: ansteorra at ansteorra.org

Subject: [Ansteorra] RE: How times have changed

 

I really can't speak for the gas prices, since I've been morally offended ever since they passed a $1 a gallon.

 

However, I've been scanning in some old photos from old events since I joined, as well as some more recent ones, and I have to say that as much as people like me bitch and moan about the overall level of costuming and accuracy, it's way better now (over all) than it was back in 1988 (please note I am not being criitcal, in general people were doing the best they could, we have more available to us now)  For that matter, it was much better in 1988 than it was in the old pics from AS1 (some pics from the First Tournament can be found at http://history.westkingdom.org/Year1/FirstTournament.htm - I'd love to see the film they talk about.  Pics from the other first year tourneys can be found off of this page http://history.westkingdom.org/Year1/index.htm -- this is your history)

 

Things change.

 

Marc/Diarmaid

 

 

Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:01:09 -0700

From: Susan Fox <selene at earthlink.net>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Imperium Compound - first results

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

 

Bear wrote:

> If anyone can locate Ioesph of Locksley, you might ask him for the

> recipe. IIRC, he is both the author of the song and one of the

> originators of the drink.  

 

I've heard from Duke Siegfried von Höflichkeit, who wrote:

 

   As I'm sure you know, Imperium Compound started as a Dark Horde

   song, a filksong on Lydia Pinkham's Medicinal Compound.  In fact

   when I asked Yang about it back in approximately AS X he told me

   there really wasn't an actual drink of that name and invited me to

   invent one -- so I did.  Or rather I adapted a recipe for Whiskey

   Sours, as I wanted something that would be "tasty" to pretty near

   anybody.  I believe Maureen (Dierdrianna) got the recipe from me

   somewhere around AS  XIII.

 

   Here is the recipe as I wrote it down, somewhere around  XV:

 

   Mix just under 1/2 cup of sugar and an equal amount of warm water to

   form a syrup.

 

   Combine with 1-2/3 cups of bourbon; 3/4 cup of fresh lemon juice

   (RealLemon works fine if it is newly opened).

 

   Heat to just under a simmer (don't let it boil or you'll bake off

   the alcohol), cool slightly, decant to bottles.  This will store for

   2-3 months.

 

   Serve chilled (you may put ice in it; it's a little overpowering

   even cold without a bit of diluting).

 

   I have no idea if there were other IC recipes circulating, but this

   is what we knew as IC.

 

OK, this is Selene again.  None of the preceding necessarily means that

Locksley didn't have his own version, after all... Keep scouring those

old notes guys.  Bwahaha.

 

Selene Colfox

 

 

Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 10:35:20 -0700

From: Susan Fox <selene at earthlink.net>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Re: Food-related Meta-Issue

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

 

Tom Vincent wrote:

> Crowns could be determined by warfare against competing armies  

> collected by those vying for the throne.  To build an army, one  

> needs to be reasonably charismatic, somewhat of a good leader &  

> organizer and (hopefully) one who reflects the higher aspirations  

> of royalty.  In other words, someone you'd be proud to have  

> represent your kingdom to other kingdoms, let alone the outside world.

 

Or the guy who buys them the most beer.  Bribery happens.

 

> It's discouraging to note that out of nineteen kingdoms, not one  

> has been allowed to experiment with -different-, let alone  

> *period*, methods of determining crowns.

 

Not so.  The Pricipality of the Mists did a six-fold list of arts for

Coronet one time.  The arts did include "Martial" and the winner did

happen to have won the fighting as well.  Sir Maythen of Elfhaven, and

SHE was a fine a sovereign as ever they had, too.  <smile>

 

> 'Defending' the current system by describing it as unfair,  

> rediculous & resulting in blockheads as crowns should tell you that  

> a better way can be had, if only to avoid that sort of 'defense'. :)

> Duriel

 

If I recall correctly, there is nothing in the SCA by-laws that

disallows it.  If you want to try to talk your kingdom into trying

something else, best of luck to you.  But don't go expecting much.  In

any era, the ones in power tend to want to stay there.  Cronyism and Old

Boys Networks are period too, n'est-ce pas?

 

Sadly, Selene

 

 

Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 19:22:16 -0400

From: "Carol Smith" <Eskesmith at hotmail.com>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Royal scions

To: "Cooks within the SCA" <sca-cooks at ansteorra.org>

 

Yes; it ran Akbar, Murad, and then Akbar (who's his own grandpa, as anyone

can see), back in 1970.  So you have a father succeeding his son, who then

succeeded his father.

Akbar again won crown in 1973.  All were pre-Pennsic reigns.

 

Regards,

Brekke

 

From: "Sandra Kisner" <sjk3 at cornell.edu>

>> In An Tir, there's Duke Gunnar Brunwolf (3 reigns) and his son, Duke Sven

>> Fallgr Gunnarsson (in the middle of his 4th reign).  Neither of them has

>> succeeded the other, however.

> Are there any examples in period of a father succeeding a son?

> Sandra

 

 

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

From: whheydt at kithrup.com (Wilson Heydt)

Subject: Re: Inside the Corporate Office: Myths and Questions

Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.

Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 19:41:18 GMT

 

Richard R. Hershberger <rrhersh at acme.com> wrote:

>Steve Mesnick wrote:

>> > All the Directors always vote the same way.

>> 

>> I'm not presenting a rigorous statistical analysis, but having followed

>> the BoD minutes for 25+ years, I think it's a pretty good bet to put

>> your money on the most conservative, don't-rock-the-boat outcome of

>> any BoD vote. That, mind you, is not necessarily a bad thing: when the

>> BoD *does* surprise us, we tend to wind up with a Tony Provine.

>Heh. I was a principal herald when the BoD voted in pay-to-play.  I

>hadn't heard anything about it ahead of time.  Someone in the kingdom

>heard a rumor about it and was outraged.  He went down the list of

>kingdom officers until he got one on the phone.  I was the lucky

>winner. This resulted in my being on the phone rather longer than I

>wanted to be, making soothing noises about how this didn't sound to me

>like the sort of thing the BoD would simply spring on us.  Didn't I

>feel foolish afterwards.   It the choice is between don't-rock-the-boat

>conservatism and sudden surprises, conservatism is frequently the less

>bad choice.  Both seem a rather pale substitute for open and forthright

>discussion.

 

I was at that meeting....asking pointed questions, which they let me

do becasue I was wearing jacket and tie.  I was also Kingdom

Constable through the mess and dealt with Provine a fair amount.  He

signally failed to understand that what Hilary referred to rogue

offices *didn't* do any reporting to corporate though a named

corporate offcier who then reported to Steward/Executive Director.

 

It was an interesting time....but one I'm not anxious to repeat.

--

        Hal Heydt

        Albany, CA

 

 

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 22:11:21 -0400

From: Johnna Holloway <johnna at sitka.engin.umich.edu>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] First cookbooks.... SCA cookbooks

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org>

 

Sue Clemenger wrote:

> 3.  What was the first period cookbook/food text you ever owned? In this

> case, mine was a photocopy of Sass' _King's Taste_ and _Queen's Taste_.

> What about the rest of you?

> --Maire, throwing out a few topics for discussion....

 

I joined 33 years ago next month, so I was actually around

prior to Pleyn Delit and Lorna Sass and Cosman. In the fall of 1973 we

were using The Horizon Cookbook, and Illustrated

History of Eating and Drinking Through the Ages, from

1968. In 1971 all the recipes came out as The Horizon Cookbook;

A Treasury of 600 Recipes From Many Centuries and Many Lands,

and that was available on remainder tables at Waldens in 73-74.

Mrs. Groundes-Peace?s Old Cookery Notebook, by Zara Groundes-Peace.

from 1971 was another favorite as was Richard Barber's

Cooking & Recipes from Rome to the Renaissance from 1973. Also out then was

The Cornucopia: by Judith and Marguerite Shalett Herman which also remaindered

cheap. My copy of Food and Drink in Britain by C. Anne Wilson dates from

1974. Food in History by Reay Tannahill also came out in 1973.

Also from 1973 was the original Seven Centuries of English Cooking by

Maxime McKendry.

 

Johnnae

 

 

From: Chris Zakes <dontivar at gmail.com>

Date: October 6, 2006 6:46:30 AM CDT

To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: [Ansteorra] Armor standards (was: Earl Marshal Out of Kingdom)

 

> Can anyone explain why Freon Cans went out of fashion?  Just the look?

>   Colin

>   (a very post Freon Can Period participant)

 

The appearance didn't help--it's almost impossible to make a freon

can look like anything except a freon can.

 

But the main reason is that the metal used for freon cans is pretty

thin, maybe 18 gauge mild steel? Over the years, people have been

slowly increasing their blow force. When an "average" blow leaves a

significant dent in a helm, then it's time to do something. The

choice was, first, to only allow "reinforced" freon can helms, then

later to ban them completely in favor of 16 gauge or heavier steel.

 

Of course, as armor standards increased, blow force increased to

match it, or maybe it's the other way 'round. That's why we now

require rigid protection over the joints (instead of knee and elbow

pads), why we now require rigid protection on the forearms (instead

of nothing), why we now require plate gauntlets or basket hilts for

both hands (instead of--depending on which year it was--hockey gloves

or light leather gloves on the sword hand and nothing on the shield

hand.) That's also why most fighters wear plate or leather on their

legs, even though it's *not* required in the rules.

 

         -Tivar Moondragon

 

 

From: "willowdewisp at juno.com" <willowdewisp at juno.com>

Date: June 25, 2007 12:23:38 PM CDT

To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org

Subject: [Ansteorra] Sca history

 

I though this might be fun I found it in the Western History project. Does anyone have a copy of  Yang's tape? Mine bit the dust.

 

willow

 

Bowing to the Empty Thrones

 

“When did we start bowing to the royal presence in the form of the empty thrones? Why?”

 

“My earliest recollection of saluting the empty thrones was during one of Henrik's early reigns (the third or fourth) when he preferred to be riding a horse to sitting on the throne. When the fighters complained that it was hard to locate him to salute at the beginning of each fight, he placed the crown on the throne and told them to salute that ... he was going riding. The populace semi-mockingly got into the spirit of the ruse - bowing/curtseying if they happened to pass in front of "The Royal Presence".

 

The fiction was so useful that it quickly became custom then formally part of the pre-combat litany shortly thereafter.” – Kevin Peregrynne

 

“Of course, there is also a Horde song called "The Empty Throne" as I'm sure you are aware. But your original question was "bowing to the royal presence" (ie the throne, when passing in front of the royal pavilion, whether or not saluting prior to a fight) as opposed to saluting per se. I think that started to happen almost as soon as we had Kings on the thrones; I'm pretty sure it was institutionalized by about AS III.” – Siegfried von Hoflichskeit

 

 

From: Chris Zakes <dontivar at gmail.com>

Date: November 9, 2007 8:42:39 PM CST

To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Crown heirs--historical/philosophical questions

 

At 11:07 AM 11/9/2007, Elizabeth wrote:

 

(snip)

 

> I believe that NO ONE should enter Crown Tourney

> unless they really want to be crown for the upcoming reign, but it

> happens anyway.  Some might say it's because they love fighting in

> that tourney, against all the really good fighters.  Some might just

> want to make sure so and so doesn't get it, the fact is it is done.

> But as this "political" side of the SCA is fairly new to me, I am sure

> there are reasons that Dukes can do this and others

> can't/shouldn't/won't whichever is the case.  It would be interesting

> to know the history behind it, but for now I will accept it as fact

> and go on.

 

As I understand things, back in the earliest days of the SCA (like AS

3 or 4) it was expected that *all* Knights would enter Crown Tourney.

Dukes, having already served twice, were exempt from that

expectation. That was the beginning of "Ducal Prerogative."

 

Around the time I joined (AS 10) I was told that Dukes could *enter*

Crown Tourney at any point during the tournament. I don't know if

that was true, or just a garbled version of the actual policy; in

those days Atenveldt stretched from Arizona north to the Canadian

border and eastward to the Atlantic Ocean. It included the lands that

are now Artemesia, the Outlands, Ansteorra, Gleann Abhann, Meridies

and Trimaris. Crown Tourneys were almost always held in central

Atenveldt (i.e. Phoenix or Tucson) and there wasn't a lot of

communication between central Atenveldt and the outlying regions.

(This was well before email was invented--if you wanted to talk to

someone you had to call them on the phone, write a letter or catch

them at an event.) Much of what we knew about how the SCA worked was,

at best, third or fourth hand.

 

These days, Ducal Prerogative means "Any Duke or Duchess entered in

the Crown Lists has the right to withdraw from the Crown lists at any

time." That's what Kingdom Law says.

 

For the record, I don't see anything in Kingdom Law that says other

fighters *can't* withdraw from Crown Tourney at any time. I've never

fought in Crown, so I don't know if there's a custom or unwritten

rule that says you shouldn't do so. But on the other hand, I agree

with Elizabeth. If you're not willing to do the job, why enter the

tourney at all? (And that's *why* I've never fought in Crown: I don't

want to be King.)

 

         -Tivar Moondragon

 

 

From: Chris Zakes <dontivar at gmail.com>

Date: November 10, 2007 10:20:44 PM CST

To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] SCA Vocabulary

 

> I have seen the phrases "feastocrat", "troll", and "dragon" quite commonly

> in my previous kingdom.  Dragon wasn't use too often; I always preferred

> horse or stead (I think that comes from the rennie side of me).  I can

> understand some people taking offense to the title of troll.  But is the

> title feastocrat considered bad here?  What do head chefs preferred  

> to be called?

> I hope I haven't offended anyone!  ;-)

> Will Meriic

 

Probably not. This is actually a recurring subject for discussion.

Story time, children!

 

While setting up the SCA's second event, Marion Zimmer Bradley (yes,

the science fiction author) was filling out a form to reserve a park

in San Francisco and one of the questions on the form was "Title."

The first thing that popped into her head was "autocrat" so that's

what she put down, and the name stuck. (One of the earlier questions

on that form was "name of organization", and "Society for Creative

Anachronism" was the first thing that popped into her head.)

 

Since then, tacking -ocrat onto any SCA-related job has become pretty  

common.

 

"Troll" was a pretty obvious pun on "toll", but that joke got old a

*long* time ago.

 

About ten or fifteen years ago (at least in Ansteorra) people started

pushing for more historically accurate names: event steward instead

of autocrat, gate instead of troll, head cook or feast steward

instead of feastocrat, privy instead of Shrine of St. John of the

Swirling Waters, etc.

 

Nowadays some folks use the historically accurate names, some folks

still use the "traditional" names. It's pretty much a matter of

personal preference. If you look through the event announcements in

the Kingdom Calendar http://calendar.ansteorra.org/ or Black Star,

you'll see that both terms are used.

 

         -Tivar Moondragon

 

 

From: Sandy Straubhaar <orchzis at hotmail.com>

Date: January 26, 2008 9:02:56 PM CST

To: <bryn-gwlad at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: Re: [Bryn-gwlad] First experiences of the SCA

 

> On Jan 24, 2008, at 9:23 AM, Sandy Straubhaar wrote:

>> I believe my first experiences of the SCA were Westercon in L.A. in

>> 1967 and Bilbo and Frodo's Birthday Party in Sycamore Grove Park

>> (also in the greater L.A. area) in the fall of 1967.  There were

>> two guys from the SCA down from the Bay Area at Bilbo's and Frodo's

>> who were wearing chain mail crafted from disassembled Army surplus

>> pot-scrubbers, sitting on top of a table lifting their tankards and

>> singing raucously in harmony.  I wanted to be them.

>> 

>> brynhildr

> So how long after that before you actually got involved in the SCA?

> Stefan

 

About 1973, West Kingdom, Shire of Southern Shores (Stanford).  I  

remember lots of wonderful events at Big Trees Campground in the East  

Bay. I helped autocrat one in the Stanford Oval.  Paul of Bellatrix  

came (he was king at the time) with his (then) little boys.  I  

remember listening to "Oak Ash and Thorn" (cool acappella men) at a  

Twelfth Night next to Sir Bela of Eastmarch (Poul Anderson).  I was  

so star-struck I didn't even talk to him.  I taught some classes at  

the "University of Ithra at Mists".  Freon can helms were still  

common (Sir William the Lucky and Mary of Uffington [IIRC] both had  

them) as well as chain mail worn on the field to fight in (ditto).  

There was some very fine garb [GARB! yo, Eule!] back then though --  

embroidery, and blockprinted fabrics, some techniques you don't see  

as much any more.  I remember some of us went to great lengths (silly  

maybe?) to hide things like coolers, and to pack away our feast gear  

in period-seeming ways (I made up a zillion kettle cloth bags with  

grosgrain-ribbon drawstrings.  Still have one -- I keep cookie  

cutters in it).

 

brynhildr

 

 

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

Subject: Re: Period Pavilions ONLY?

From: dicconf at radix.net (Richard Eney)

Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 15:49:46 -0500

 

In article <JGr8JA.Fsq at kithrup.com>,

Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt at kithrup.com> wrote:

>BearDrummer <BearDrummer at gmail.com> wrote:

>>4. We are Creative, not Compulsive.

>Please keep in mind, though, that it is dangerous to read any

>deep philosophical or didactic significance into the term

>"Creative Anachronism."  You do know that Marion Zimmer Bradley

>made it up on the spur of the moment when she had an East Bay

>Regional Parks form to fill out?

 

And it was intended to refer to the anachronism of doing

medieval things in the 20th century, _not_ to doing things that

would be anachronistic in a medieval context.

 

=Tamar the Gypsy

 

 

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca

From: djheydt at kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)

Subject: Re: Period Pavilions ONLY?

Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.

Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 22:00:09 GMT

 

Richard Eney <dicconf at radix.net> wrote:

>Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt at kithrup.com> wrote:

>>BearDrummer <BearDrummer at gmail.com> wrote:

>> 

>>>4. We are Creative, not Compulsive.

>> 

>>Please keep in mind, though, that it is dangerous to read any

>>deep philosophical or didactic significance into the term

>>"Creative Anachronism."  You do know that Marion Zimmer Bradley

>>made it up on the spur of the moment when she had an East Bay

>>Regional Parks form to fill out?

>And it was intended to refer to the anachronism of doing

>medieval things in the 20th century, _not_ to doing things that

>would be anachronistic in a medieval context.

 

Well, that is certainly an interpretation that got attached to it

very early on, and it's a good one.  I don't promise, however,

that it was consciously in Marion's mind at the time she wrote it

on the form.  Remember that the mood of the second tourney was

"That [i.e., the first tourney] was fun, let's do it again!"

[i.e., a second time].  It was in the summer of 1966, between the

second and third, that we all sat around for hours and hours in

Dave Thewlis's house listening to _Carmina Burana_ and thinking,

"My gosh, we could do this *again and again and again!"*

 

*sigh* Memories....  

 

If only I had a time machine and could go back to that summer.

Knowing what I know now, I would've tried for a few changes from

what we eventually stumbled into doing, particularly in the rank

system. Too late now.

 

It was fun, though.

 

Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin                         Dorothy J. Heydt

Mists/Mists/West                               Vallejo, California

PRO DEO ET REGE                               djheydt at kithrup.com

 

 

From: Cathal <cathal at mindspring.com>

Date: Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:45 PM

Subject: [TY] A sad passing

To: meridian-ty at yahoogroups.com

 

The First Knight of the Society has Passed Away

 

Submitted by Juana Isabella on Tue, 2008/09/23 - 21:32.

The First Knight of the Society, Sir Ardral Argo Ver Kaeysc, also

known as David the Herald, and known in modern times at David Bradley,

died in his sleep on Thursday, September 11, 2008.

He was 57. He was Diana Listmaker's nephew. A wake will be held for

friends and family.

 

Sir Ardral was knighted on May 1, A.S. I (modernly 1966) at the very

first tournament of what would become the Society for Creative

Anachronism. The venue (around Berkeley, California) would later

become part of the West Kingdom. His heraldic device, registered in

1971, is blazoned "Sable, a pall argent surmounting a pall inverted

Or."

 

***The foregoing is from SCAtoday.net***

 

Cathal.

 

 

From: "Elisabeth B. Zakes" <kitharis at gmail.com>

Date: February 24, 2009 11:55:50 AM CST

To: Barony of Bryn Gwlad <bryn-gwlad at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: Re: [Bryn-gwlad] Lower Legs.

 

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:41, Eric W. Brown <Brown.EricW at jobcorps.org> wrote:

I was talking to Galen Von Kirkenbaur this weekend, and we were talking about

Why lower legs are "illegal" in heavy combat.

He said he’d talked to one of the "old timers" who’d been there, and

It seemed that instead of a safety issue, like everyone says it was an esthetics issue.

 

The way it was explained to me when I started training (1977) was that it was due to what we were all presumed to be wearing -- chain armour, open-faced helm, gauntlets, greaves (-not- armour actually worn) -- this has evolved a bit since then, but not a lot.

 

Call a face shot of -any- strength good because of the open-faced helm. Hands and anything knees and below were presumed to be too protected to hit, so we disallowed it (also reduced the likelihood of broken hands, and dislocated or otherwise injured knees). Everything else was called as if hit through chain armour.

 

Aethelyan Moondragon

Ansteorran fossil

 

From: Chris Zakes <dontivar at gmail.com>

Date: February 24, 2009 3:40:43 PM CST

To: Barony of Bryn Gwlad <bryn-gwlad at lists.ansteorra.org>

Subject: Re: [Bryn-gwlad] Lower Legs.

 

<<< I was talking to Galen Von Kirkenbaur this weekend, and we were talking about Why lower legs are "illegal" in heavy combat.

 

He said he'd talked to one of the "old timers" who'd been there, and

It seemed that instead of a safety issue, like everyone says it was an esthetics issue. >>>

 

I've never heard that before, but when I joined in AS 10, lower leg blows were already illegal. I was always told it was a safety thing.

 

On the other hand, there's this bit from "The Annals" of John Stowe, published in 1631, but speaking of the time of Queen Elisabeth, around 1578:

 

"And in the winter season, all the high streets were much annoyed and troubled with hourly frays, of sword and buckler men, who took pleasure in that bragging fight; and although they made great show of much fury, and fought often. Yet seldom any man hurt, for thrusting was not then in use; neither would one of twenty strike beneath the waist, by reason they held it cowardly and beastly."

 

So it's possible that the esthetics issue has some historical validity, too.

 

       -Tivar Moondragon

 

 

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:12:26 -0500

From: Michael Gunter <countgunthar at hotmail.com>

Subject: [Sca-cooks] Masters at Arms

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org>

 

Ansteorra has had several MoAs and in the early years most

of our high-ranking fighters were Masters. Atenveldt was almost

exclusively Masters for their first years mainly because their

biggest influence was from Duke Richard of Montroyal, MoA.

 

I had a friend, Sir Starhelm Warlocke (shows just how old those

days were), who lived in Meredies at the time he was offered

the accolade. He wanted to be a MoA like his teacher at the

time, Duke Lloyd von Eaker. The Crown sent him away saying

they would only make Knights. Unfortunately for the Crown

Starhelm happened to be dating Katherine Kurtz who was

the Steward of the Society at the time. After many angry

words and threats Starhelm was eventually granted the only

"Knight Bachelor" in the Society. He wore a White Belt but

never swore fealty and was not allowed to wear the chain.

 

When I was approached to be elevated I nearly decided to

become a Master because I never felt I'd be courtly enough

for knighthood. I can see myself as more the weaponsmaster

who teaches the young squires and knights. But I decided that

all my life I wanted to be a knight. Not the same as, but different.

So I was belted and chained and have spent the next two decades

trying to live up to it.

 

I believe that a knight swears his oath but once and all the other

times are just re-affirmations of that original oath. If I don't kneel

before the Crown and say the words does not mean I'm not in

fealty. I also feel that the knights are the only group this rule

applies to.

 

Baronies in fief are the only group who are required to swear fealty.

Officers swear oaths of service, which are different.

Any other oaths sworn are gifts of personal fealty to the personages

wearing the Crown.

 

Yers,

Gunthar

 

 

Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 06:28:45 -0400

From: Elaine Koogler <kiridono at gmail.com>

Subject: Re: [Sca-cooks] Honey Butter

To: Cooks within the SCA <sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org>

 

On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:29 AM, David Friedman <ddfr at daviddfriedman.com>wrote:

<<< By the early eighties--or for that matter the early-seventies--there were

lots of period recipes findable. The sort of things you are describing

weren't--and aren't--the result of grabbing whatever medieval/Renaissance

recipe someone could find. They were the result of grabbing modern recipes

that the person doing the grabbing either thought sounded as though they

might be period or liked.

--

David/Cariadoc >>>

 

They may have been available to those with access to major libraries that

had copies of these books, but to most of us they weren't.  I think the

first actual cookbook I saw was "How to Cook Forsoothly," an SCA publication

with recipes of questionable authenticity (though the pea soup recipe is

still one of my favs!!)  I did get a copy of the cookbook anthology that

Your Grace put together, but my copy was at best a fourth generation copy,

had four ms pages to a page and was pretty much unreadable.  Then a friend

of mine at Virginia Tech managed to get me copies of several books, but the

only actual period book was an early translation (not great) of Platina.  I

also acquired, at that time, a copy of Fabulous Feasts.  And I had a much

larger library at that point, than did most!  I became aware of such books

as "To the King's Taste," "To the Queen's Taste" and "Dining with William

Shakespeare," though it was a long time before I actually acquired copies of

these.

 

So yes, we did grab whatever we thought was period or whatever we got from

the cooks we learned from (locally, we learned from Sir Tojenareum Grenville

of Devon, whom Your Grace probably knows!).  But I think most of us have

also "grabbed" any new sources as we became aware of them!

 

Kiri

 

 

Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:40:31 +1000

From: Paul Sleigh <bat at flurf.net>

Subject: Re: [Lochac] Grant and Census Committees

To: "The Shambles, the SCA Lochac mailing list" <lochac at sca.org.au>

 

Al Muckart wrote:

<<< Ahh, I see what you mean. I guess I see Caid and the West as being  

sufficiently culturally different now - Caid having separated  

(calved?) from the West 34 years ago - that there are meaningful  

differences between kingdoms who are now their direct descendants. >>>

 

I believe they (used to?) talk about two types of kingdom: Kingdoms of

the Word, that got their culture by direct contact with the West (West,

Caid, An Tir) and Kingdoms of the Book, that got their culture through

the Known World Handbook and via long-distance communication (East,

probably Middle, and so on).

 

If I remember rightly, the difference is explained thus:

 

Q. How many kings does it take to change a lightbulb is a Kingdom of the

Book?

A. One, but only after discussion with the peers and other elders, which

may in many cases lead to the strong recommendation that the lightbulb

changing be postponed for a little while so that more options can be

canvassed.

 

Q. How many kings does it take to change a lightbulb is a Kingdom of the

Word?

A. One, and we'll get on that right away, Sire!  No problem!  Your Word

is Law!  (Right, he's distracted.  Hide the ladder until after Coronation.)

 

 

This is all, of course, (a) old and (b) second-hand.

 

: Bat :

 

 

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:55:00 +1000

From: "M. Lenehan" <lenehan at our.net.au>

Subject: Re: [Lochac] Grant and Census Committees

To: "The Shambles, the SCA Lochac mailing list" <lochac at sca.org.au>

 

<<< Does anyone know when the first Known World Handbook was published?

Unless it was really early, the East and Middle kingdoms must surely

predate it (they became kingdoms in AS III and IV, I think).

 

Katherine >>>

 

Katherine, I believe you are right.

 

Before the Known World Handbook, there was "A Handbook of the (Current)

Middle Ages" -one edition only I believe. I am sitting with a copy of it in

my lap; I found it when I went looking for our first KWH which I can't find

(but I'm sure it was published about AS15 -  I did find a copy of the 20th

year edition). The H.CMA is A4 sized, with about  20 yellowing pages. Rather

charming in an amateurish way, it's been printed by roneo machine, and the

font bears the hallmarks of an old type writer, but still the beating heart

of the Society is strong in this one!

 

Here's what it reads on the title page;

 

"A Handbook of the (Current) Middle Ages is published by the Society for

Creative Anachronism, Inc. on a grant from the Baycon Committee to

commemorate the Baycon Tourney, held under the auspices of the Society for

Creative Anachronism Inc., September 2nd, 1968, at the 26th World Science

Fiction Convention. Special thanks are in order to Alva Rogers, Bill Donaho,

and J. Ben Stark, co-chairman of the Baycon committee, without whom this

handbook would not have been possible."

 

There you are, a date! I think Baycon was held in San Francisco and this

event may have been the launching point for the West to spread the word and

the seeds of other Kingdoms. I think it had a lot to do with the start of

Caid but I'm only going by a memory plucked from the murky depths.

 

It is interesting to note that there is nothing written about the start of

the Society, nor about how decisions are made, except that it outlines the

roles of the BOD, and the Seneschal, explaining that the BOD was a

convenience to meet legal requirements of the State of California. It makes

no reference to any other Kingdom or State.

 

According to the intro chapter on what the SCA is, Knights and Laurels are

the only Patents. Kings cannot succeed themselves, (second-time Kings are

Dukes) and everything revolves around the Crown Tournament. The intro also

states that because they are not into being a spectacle for the sneering

masses, pre 1650 garb is required of everyone (no hint of how the

Conventioneers coped with that one at the Tourney). The other articles are

Scribes, garb making, armour and weapon making, and fighting techniques. No

heraldry except a laurel wreath, no cultural practises referenced.

 

I hope this was useful and/or interesting.

 

Maddie

 

 

To:    CALONTIR at listserv.unl.edu

Date:    Thu, 19 Nov 2009 12:21:40 EST

From:    Fernando Vigil <Fvigil at AOL.COM>

Subject: Re: Question ASAP - one

 

Okay I've done a bit of checking on this matter, and the more I look the  

more clear it is that reason for the SCA's ending date has essentially been

obfuscated by the passing years. But this is what I've found:

 

The flyer for the First Tournament in 1966 did not include any date at  all.

 

Within the first year of the Society 1650 appeared on some flyers. It  has

been reported that Diana Listmaker (the host of the First  Tournamnet stated

that this was a typo, and that she had originally meant  1150, but if this

is true, 1150 is likely not any more easily defended date than  1600 or 1650.

 

In 1968, Queen Carol's Guide (a newcomers guide to the SCA commissioned by  

Her Majesty Carol of Beletrix) stated that our period went to 1650, but in

the same year the SCA's Articles of Incorporation were filed  with

"Pre-Seventeenth Century" (that is to say pre-1600). To confuse things  a bit

further, one of the signers of those original Articles was Diana Paxson  (lnown as Diana Listmaker)

 

Things get even more confusing because some of the early members report  

that at in the early years the cut off date for the fighting standards was  

1450, and the cut off date the heralds used has changed as well.

 

Now, none of that really answers the question of why these dates... But  

I'm honestly not sure there was B) a well thought out reason, or B)  

necessarily an agreement as to the reason.

 

Fernando

 

PS. The most interesting thing about this for me is that despite it having  

been only 40 years ago, and despite our near universal literacy and

amazingly improved communications, we still can't answer a simple question like

this with confidence. What does this tell us about the accuracy of period

accounts of  battles, political situations, or tournaments - especially those

that were  chronicled years later by folks who were not  there....

 

 

From: "Cynfyn ap Rhydderch MacCulloch" <cynfynsca at gmail.com>

Date: May 31, 2011 10:08:44 PM CDT

To: <the-triskele-tavern at googlegroups.com>

Subject: RE: {TheTriskeleTavern} Random Question from a (still) semi-newbie

 

Stefan,

 

Here is the breakdown of the Kingdoms of the Known World, when they were

created and what areas they cover:

1. The West Kingdom was created when the Society originated in 1966. It

currently includes Northern California, most of Nevada, and Alaska, as well

as Japan, Korea, and the Pacific Rim (excluding Australia and New Zealand).

2. The Kingdom of the East was created in 1968. In the United States it

covers eastern Pennsylvania, eastern New York, Delaware, New Jersey,

Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine.

In Canada, it covers Quebec, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New

Brunswick, and Newfoundland.

3. The Middle Kingdom was created in 1969. Its current borders include

Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, lower Michigan, and parts of Kentucky, Iowa and

Ontario.

4. The Kingdom of Atenveldt was created in 1971. It originally

encompassed all the lands between the West, East, and Middle Kingdoms, and

now consists of the state of Arizona, along with small parts of Utah and

California.

5. The Kingdom of Meridies was created in 1978 from the Kingdom of

Atenveldt. Its borders currently encompass the entirety of Alabama; almost

all of Georgia; all of Middle and East Tennessee, plus a substantial portion

of West Tennessee; a bit of the panhandle of Florida; and small portions of

both Kentucky and Virginia.

6. The Kingdom of Caid was created in 1978 from the Kingdom of the West.

It currently encompasses Southern California, the Las Vegas metropolitan

area, and Hawaii.

7. The Kingdom of Ansteorra was created in 1979 from the Kingdom of

Atenveldt. Ansteorra covers Oklahoma and most of Texas as well as the

International Space Station.

8. The Kingdom of Atlantia was created in 1981 from the Kingdom of the

East. Its borders cover Maryland, most of Virginia, North Carolina, and

South Carolina, as well as Augusta, Georgia.

9. The Kingdom of An Tir was created in 1982 from the Kingdom of the

West. It encompasses the US states of Oregon, Washington, and the northern

tips of Idaho, and in Canada it covers British Columbia, Alberta,

Saskatchewan, the Yukon, and the Northwest Territories.

10. The Kingdom of Calontir was created in 1984 from the Kingdom of the

Middle. It covers Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, and the 727xx Zip Code

area around Fayetteville, Arkansas.

11. The Kingdom of Trimaris was created in 1985. It was split from the

Kingdom of Meridies and is composed of the majority of Florida, as well as

Panama, and falsely but humorously, Antarctica (although see Lochac, below).

Also, as a triskele (the Trimaris symbol) was sent into space on a

shuttle[citation needed], Trimaris claims space.

12. The Kingdom of the Outlands was created in 1986 from the Kingdom of

Atenveldt. It encompasses New Mexico, most of Colorado, parts of Wyoming,

the panhandle of Nebraska, as well as El Paso County and Hudspeth County of

Texas.

13. The Kingdom of Drachenwald was created in 1993 from the Kingdom of the

East. It is by far the largest kingdom in terms of land area, but not in

population. It covers all of Europe (including islands), Africa, and the

Middle East. In a humorous twist, it achieved its independence on the Fourth

of July.

14. The Kingdom of Artemisia was created in 1997 from the Kingdom of

Atenveldt. It currently covers Montana, southern Idaho, most of Utah,

northwestern Colorado, and southwestern Wyoming.

15. The Kingdom of Æthelmearc was created in 1997 from the Kingdom of the

East. It covers northeastern/central/western Pennsylvania, central/western

New York, and West Virginia.

16. The Kingdom of Ealdormere was created in 1998 from the Kingdom of the

Middle. It comprises most of the Canadian province of Ontario.

17. The Kingdom of Lochac was created in 2002 from the Kingdom of the West

(Australia) and the Kingdom of Caid (New Zealand). It encompasses the

entirety of Australia and New Zealand, and was granted prior title by the

Board of the Society to the Australian administered parts of Antarctica, in

contradiction of the later claim put forward by the Kingdom of Trimaris.

18. The Kingdom of Northshield was created in 2004 from the Kingdom of the

Middle. It covers North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the

upper peninsula of Michigan. It also extends into Canada, encompassing

Manitoba and northwestern Ontario.

19. The Kingdom of Gleann Abhann was created in 2005 from the Kingdom of

Meridies. It covers Mississippi, Louisiana, most of Arkansas, and the

western edge of Tennessee including the Memphis area.

 

YIS,

Ld Cynfyn ap Rhydderch MacCulloch (called Kwasi)

 

-----Original Message-----

From: the-triskele-tavern at googlegroups.com

[mailto:the-triskele-tavern at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Stefan li Rous

Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:32 PM

To: the-triskele-tavern at googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: {TheTriskeleTavern} Random Question from a (still) semi-newbie

 

19 kingdoms? !  They added a few more when I wasn't looking. :-)  I'd  

have said 17 or 18. And that is a much larger number than when I  

joined in 1988.

 

I guess that statement works as an overall, brief statement. It's not  

unlike what I say, but it's so... dry. so.. empty. The SCA is really  

so much more. And it differs for each participant. I have whole, large  

files in the Florilegium about what brought different people into the  

SCA and what keeps them here.

 

Stefan

 

 

Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 14:18:53 -0700

From: "Frederick J. Hollander" <flieg at berkeley.edu>

Subject: Re: [Lochac] Some heraldic answers

To: The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list <lochac at lochac.sca.org>

 

((The clouds of lurking dissolve from around a bearded figure wearing a

simple tunic and a totally disreputable once-brown floppy hat.))

 

Flieg here --

 

Bats, how dare you be reasonable!

 

Two comments --

 

There have been recent tests of color copier images. Inadvertent

ones, but tests.  The answer is color shifts occurred over a time period

of *days* while the submission was en-route from the submitter to the

Kingdom heralds office by way of the US Postal Service.  (This was in

the USA, not Australia.)

 

About Society for Creative Anachronism:  An anachronism is something

that is "out of its proper time", like our entire attempt at re-creating

aspects of the original Middle Ages.  It has nothing to do with our

failure to accurately re-create them.  The name exists because a clerk

at the reservation office for the East Bay Regional Parks District

(Approximate location: Oakland, California, USA) had a line to fill in

on the reservation sheet.

 

"What is the name of the group?" was the question asked of the small

group of people who were reserving the park. (This was in 1966, AS I.)

 

"Uh...." they said, intelligently.

 

"Put down 'Society for Creative Anachronism'," said Marion Breen (better

known to all as Marion Zimmer-Bradley), so the clerk wrote down Society

for Creative Anachronism, and the rest is history.

 

Her explanation of her choice of words, as I have heard it, is that we

were Creative and we were creating Anachronism.  And now you know.

 

((The mists of lurking reform and the figure fades into the electronic

background.))

 

On 6/24/2011 1:55 PM, Paul Sleigh wrote:

<<< I was going to stay out of this discussion, because nothing kills a

good rant like some facts and perspective, and I like a good rant as

much as the next wild-eyes, spittle-flecked lunatic.  But when even

heralds start saying silly things, with or without punctuation, then

it's time to inject some reality into the proceedings.  I don't expect

it'll help, but I have to be seen to be trying...

[.trim.]>

* The Word "Anachronism"

 

A short, snarky word on this:  the word Society reminds us that we are

a world-wide community.  The word Creative reminds us that we strive

toward the goal of building things that are worth building.  The word

Anachronism reminds us that nobody is perfect.  The first two words

are aspirational; the third is because group names also need nouns.

The first two words give us something to work toward; the last one

most certainly does not give us an excuse to give up when it's all a

bit too hard.

[.trim.]

 

: Bat, Mortar Herald : >>>

 

 

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:14:50 -0700 (PDT)

From: Stephen Kiefert <lanhamlaw at att.net>

To: atlantia at seahorse.atlantia.sca.org

Subject: [MR] daily kingdom history fact 10

 

In December 1985, the SCA Board of Directors revoked the fighter authorizations of all fighters under the age of fourteen.

 

Stefan of Cambion

Kingdom Historian

 

 

Subject: Re: A question

Posted by: "Erik Telemark" irongld at gmail.com irongld

Date: Thu Oct 20, 2011 7:44 am ((PDT))

 

SCA time was an old and cherished custom back in 1973 (A.S.7)

 

Erik

 

On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:07 AM, "first" <greenshield at hotmail.com> wrote:

 

<<< The concept of SCA time has always been with us. It's been that way since I started in 1984 and it was and old concept by that time. I'd suspect the "1st party" wasn't on time either. Is it a good thing? Probably not considering all the activities that go on during an event but it is something to expect and work around.

 

C >>>

 

 

Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 17:05:24 -0700

From: "Megan" <western_duchess at yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: [Lochac] Ducal prerogative

To: "'The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list'"

        <lochac at lochac.sca.org>

 

The original intent was that dukes would not have to fight ... what it

morphed into was that dukes could fight and drop out at any time in the list

up to and including finals.  Some well-intentioned higher ranking folk in

the fighting world tried to bring it back in the West kingdom a number of

years ago and it was a very hard and passionate fight to stop it because

those fighters were some of our legends and many didn't want to speak out

against them.  The idea was withdrawn, but there was a lot of hurt feelings

during the whole "discussion".  

 

Megan, western lurker

 

-----Original Message-----

<<< My understanding of "Ducal Perogative" is that in he old days, it as

expected that any knights present would contest the Crown Tournament.

"Ducal Perogative" gave Dukes (and non-discrimatorially, Duchesses) the

ability to say "I've done it twice- I'm sitting this one out".

 

I've been playing 27 years now and it I was told it was ancient history when

I first heard about it...

 

Agro >>>

 

 

Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 11:10:00 +1100

From: Ian Whitchurch <ian.whitchurch at gmail.com>

Subject: Re: [Lochac] Ducal prerogative

To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"

        <lochac at lochac.sca.org>

 

Sir Agro,

 

That's true as far as it goes, but only partially true - remember, some

of the Great and the Good of West Kingdom were pretty selective in

what they told us about, so Lochac got the view of the SCA as it

should have been, not how it really was.

 

The weak version of Ducal Prerogative was how you described, and how

we were told.

 

The strong version of "Ducal Prerogative" let to drop out of the Crown

Tournament, once the candidate you wanted was out. This meant that a

Duke, super or otherwise, could go in the stop a candidate, and retire

once they or another had stopped them.

 

To quote Siegfried von Hoflichskeit, one of the original Knights, on the matter

 

"Boy did it ever suck. There was no 'probability' of abuse in the

Kindgoms that used this one either. It was quite explicitly a tool

that either the Duke in person or the reigning monarch used to control

the outcome of the lists, and accepted as such.

 

Siegfried von Hoflichskeit"

 

Anton de Stoc

 

PS http://history.westkingdom.org/AHP/MiscQuestions.htm

 

 

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 04:54:29 +1100

From: Peter Ryan <gwynforlwyd at gmail.com>

Subject: Re: [Lochac] Fairness and change

To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"

        <lochac at lochac.sca.org>

 

Why can, "You rule because they believe" not apply to same sex pairings on

the thrones. We have same sex partners as Baron and Baroness. Little steps.

have been made. Originaly women were not allowed to fight at all in the SC,

and didn't that debate rage fierce! Whilst the US BoD's ruling profoundly

disappoint me, I am thinking that, like gay marriage, this is a battle that

will inevitably be won. I hope I'm around to see them both.

 

The most current list of women sovereigns (Queen or Priness by right of

arms) is:

 

Queen by Right of Arms

 

January 1991

Rowan Beatrice von Kampfer

Queen of Ansteorra

 

Princess by Right of Arms

 

May 1981

Maythen Gervaise

Princess of the Mists

 

January 1988

Gwenllian Rhiannon of Dragon Keep

Princess of Drachenwald

 

September 1996

Elizabeth Mortimer

Princess of Ealdormere

 

January 1997

Viress? de Lighthaven

Princess of Oertha

 

July 1998

Richenza von Schlagen

Princess of Oertha

 

May 2003

Bryne McClellan

Princess of the Mists

 

July 2003

Richenza von Schlagen

Princess of Oertha

 

Gwynfor

 

<the end>



Formatting copyright © Mark S. Harris (THLord Stefan li Rous).
All other copyrights are property of the original article and message authors.

Comments to the Editor: stefan at florilegium.org