Laws and calendars

[Galen of Bristol]

Galen of Bristol here!

dennis grace wrote:
> 
> Greetings, Cousins,
> 
> Lyonel ici.
> <snip> 
> Second, along the same lines, I came across Article V, Section 4:  Perpetual
> Events, which says,
> 
>         Section 4: Perpetual Events
> 
>         a. These are Baronial or Provincial events which have definite dates
>         reserved on the Calendar of Events for them each year.
> 
>                  <snip--i. through xii., naming the twelve events for twelve
> baronies>
> 
>         b. These events are specifically not protected and may have other events
>         scheduled on the same date.
> 
>         c. The Baron/ess together with the baronial seneschal may petition the
>         Crown to waive a perpetual event for one year.
> 
>         d. The Baron/ess together with the baronial seneschal may petition the
>         Crown to change the date of a perpetual event.
> 
>         e. In the event that Crown Toumament is scheduled on a weekend
> designated as an perpetual event weekend, that Barony or Province will
> be given the option of either moving its perpetual event to a different
> calendar date for that year, or waiving it as per subsection (c).
> 
> Okay, so here's my question:  what purpose does this list serve?  The events
> have a "reserved" weekend, but they are specifically NOT "protected"(???).
> I don't want to sound sarcastic, but is this actually supposed to mean
> anything?  Is the general understanding of this arrangement clearer than the
> written law?  How might NOT having a major, repeating event--Lyonesse, for
> example--on this list affect the event's scheduling?
> 
> I'm probably just not looking in the right place, but until someone points
> me in the right direction, I'll remain

I wrote the original version of this section in 1988.  At the time, 
through deals made with prior rulers by the barons of Steppes and Namron,
the dates for Steppes Warlord and Namron Protectorate were _protected_
from conflict, and their dates permanently reserved on the calendar by
law (Memorial Day and Columbus Day weekends, respectively).  In the
feeling that this was bad because 1) too many protected weekends clutters
the calendar and 2) only two out of (then) seven baronies with dates
reserved for their biggest events was unfair, I drafted a proposal
whereby each barony was given a specific date for their biggest or 
favorite event.  Bryn Gwlad chose the first weekend of February for
Candlemas, for instance.

The advantage to the barony of a reserved date is that their request for
a date for the event will never be turned down because of conflict with 
something held by a smaller group, or something new being held by another 
event or the kingdom.  The advantages to other groups is that Shadowlands
need never worry that Steppes Warlord will be moved to conflict with 
Roundtable Tourney, unless they hold it Memorial Day weekend (which they 
may choose to do, but they'd have to get pretty Aggie to want that).

When smaller groups know well in advance (years, even) when the biggest 
events will be, it makes their planning easier.

Example (the law prevents this):  Say Lyonesse hasn't been scheduled yet. 
Bryn Gwlad wants to do a big "high persona" event like "Ladies' 
Tournament of Chivalry III", or something new and never tried before, 
and (whether through malice, ignorance, thoughtlessness, whatever -- all 
these happen with autocrats) they reserve the date Bjornsborg has 
traditionally had for Lyonesse before the Bjornsborgers apply for it.  
Without this law, Bjornsborg can't complain about the loss of their 
traditional date because Bryn Gwlad was on the calendar first.  Under 
this law, Bryn Gwlad has gotta know that Lyonesse _will_ be that weekend,
and they probably don't want that weekend because Bjornsborg is there 
first.

The original intent was originally to prevent Crown events from being 
scheduled on those weekends, too.  I see that's been amended out.

At the time this was published, the Baron and Baroness of the Steppes, 
feeling (correctly) that the protected nature of Steppes Warlord was 
being lost, and Steppes' "specialness" (forgive me) -- in having a 
privilege only one other barony shared -- was being diminished, took the 
view that I had initiated harm to the Barony of the Steppes (a point of 
view I understand, but as Kingdom Seneschal my mandate was the best 
interests of the whole kingdom).  They were very upset with me, and I am 
given to understand that (although they were friends of mine and are so 
today) they made me pay a very high price for this action.

> Yours in Confused Service
> 
> Sir Lyonel Oliver Grace
> _________________________
> Dennis G. Grace
> Postmodern Medievalist
> Division of Rhetoric and Composition
> Department of English
> University of Texas at Austin
> amazing at mail.utexas.edu
> ___________________
> 
> Baro, metetz en guatge                    |  Lords, pawn your castles,
> Chastels e vilas e ciutatz                |  your towns and cities.
> Enanz qu'usquecs no'us guerreiatz         |  Before you're beat to the draw,
>                                                     draw your swords.
> 
>                    -- Bertran de Born (a really fun Viscount)

- Galen of Bristol
Seneschal of Ansteorra under Mikael I, Gerard and Patrick I
(a mediocre Viscount)

-- 
Viscount Galen of Bristol, KSCA, CSM, etc. (now upgraded with ASTA!)
Paul Mitchell, pmitchel at flash.net / "noblesse oblige"
http://www.flash.net/~pmitchel/galen.htm (new site!)