I. Marc Carlson
IMC at vax2.utulsa.edu
Tue Jul 11 10:34:42 PDT 1995
I'm combining a few messages here.
From: Aedden<Paul Shore <shore at pp.okstate.edu>>
(Sorry if I misspelled it)
>I was wondering lately, is Feast Gear itself period? Should we
>be trying to get away from the bring your own 'potluck' table settings?
That's a valid question, and I honestly don't know. I *do* know that
some "common" tableware is period (such as the "great cup) for some areas
and eras. By common, I am referring to sharing your tableware with other
people at table with you. However, I place that on the list of goals
that are improbable to pull off at this time.
However, I tend to agree with Catherine that providing that much tableware
could be a massive undertaking (although I know that we went ahead last year
and purchased a large amount of spare gear, owned and held by the shire, for
those people who don't actually have their own).
Definately worth thinking about, though.
From: "Pug" <pug at arlut.utexas.edu>
>> First Aid Attendent Chirurgeon Barber
>And why not Chirurgeon? Although Chirurgeon implies more than just first
>aid, it seems reasonable enough to me. Since Chirurgeon is a surgeon,
>and we want something less drastic.
While I don't object to the term, per se, I'm curious about looking into
what the words meant in Period (which obviously is different things at
If you are curious, Richard Gabriel and Karen Metz, in their _History
of Military Medicine_ have a fascinating amount to say about the developent
of the untrained barber into the frowned-upon surgeon, but essentially,
during much of the Period we are concerned with, healing was divided into
those who healed by prescribing from a distance, and those who did so by
a more active "hands on" approach. The latter *is*, in fact, the barber
and surgeon. Unfortunately, they were not looked on we by those around
them because most were untrained and often little more than butchers making
guesses. The eventual (late and post period) development into the
professional "surgeon" class helped to train the practitioners better, but
the stigma remained attached. As late as the 19th C (since I can not speak
for a certainty about to day) in England, for example, Surgeons weren't
"Doctors" (It's a trivial, but in some ways interesting shift in the
character of Watson in the Holmes stories).
While many Americans are likely to remain unaware of such a stigma to the
terminology (let alone the position), it remains an aspect of "authenticity"
to at least examine.
>> Dinner Feast ?
>Why not feast or banquet? That's what it is, and should be period.
Feast is a perfectly good term. It's also the *only* term we seem to use.
>> --------- Guild ?
>Why not Guild? Ours are a little different, but they serve the same purpose.
Not exactly. Certainly ours are (to quote the OED):
1. A confraternity, brotherhood, or association formed for
the mutual aid and protection of its members, or for the
prosecution of some common purpose.
a. Primarily applied to associations of mediaeval
b. Used in the names of various modern associations, with
more or less notion of imitating the medieaval guilds in
their object, spirit, or constitution.
Or at least they are supposed to "prosecute some common purpose".
Unfortunately when I hear the term "guild" I tend to think of trade
associations (meant for economic protection) and social groups or
"Clubs". I could, can, and have lived with that, but my personal peeve
tends to be exacerbated by the continued overuse of the term. Any time
anyone wants to get together, they form a "guild" (as in needleworker's
guild; brewer's guild; (if you'll pardon me Aedden, since I realize it's
what the system has stuck you with) Cooking Guild, and so forth. Most
of these organizations would not likely be really called this (although
they might be referred to as this at times), even assuming they ever
What's wrong with something akin to "The Society of Needleworkers", "The
Fraternity of Brewers" or "The Honorable Company of St. Laurence"?
Perhaps even arrange these things as legitimate organizations *within*
the Society, with officers, etc.
Don't mind me. I'm just fussy.
(Oh, and since I know it's going to come up regarding that last suggestion)
I *do* question any representation of the "Middle Ages as they should have
been" that not merely keeps us from having to endure religious ceremonies and
rituals for religions we may neither mundanely belong to nor are interested in
(something I *do* agree with), but goes so far as to ignore its existance all
From: Elizabeth Shahan <ecs at infinity.ccsi.com>
>Clearly we have adequate terms to describe the people who fight heavy
>weapons style of SCA combat, but can we find a better term than *heavy
>weapons combat*? The rapier or light weapons style can be called by a
>period term ie: Fencing. Is there a similar term that could be used here
>that would also be recognised as distinct from fencing?
I'm still looking.
"Mihi Satis Apparet Propter Diarmuit Ui Dhuinn
Se Ipsum Appetenda Sapientia" University of Northkeep
-- St. Dunstan Northkeepshire, Ansteorra
(I. Marc Carlson/IMC at vax2.utulsa.edu)
More information about the Ansteorra