Principalities

[Lisa A. May]

On Tue, 17 Sep 1996, Rik Packham/Angus mac Taggart wrote:

> Unto Countess Margaret ny Connor doth Angus mac Taggart bid forgiveness.
> 
> I misspoke myself when talking about the travel issue with the Crown. I
> _do_ understand that they will have to travel the same lands, but when they
> do they ussually (forgive me if I am wrong. I have never been nor ever plan
> on being King) do the main events in an area. With the principality in
> place, would not the Coronet alleviate some of the stress as far as the
> smaller events go? Could not the Coronet visit Shire of Bubba and Canton of
> Clyde giving a cense of ownership to the people of the shire and canton?
> 
Greetings Angus!

Well, your theory is true as far as it goes; however, the creation of 
three principalities also creates many more events that will become 
"important" principality events (coronets, investitures, champions 
events, etc.)  The Crown will eventually be expected to honor these 
events with their presence.  It's human nature -- if the Crown attends 
one principality's coronet tourney, the others will feel slighted if they 
don't attend theirs, etc.  And, I certainly don't envy the Crown sitting 
the throne when the split occurs.  What a nightmare year that will be!  
Three Coronet tourneys, three investitures, warranting of principality 
officers, paperwork, paperwork, paperwork, etc. on top of the normal 
expectations and responsibilities of the Crown.  ugh.

Please keep in mind that I am not talking about the benefit to the smaller
groups of having more royalty to grace their events.  This benefit will
undoubtedly occur.  What I am saying is that the burden to the *crown*
will not decrease, and may even increase.  While they may no longer feel 
it necessary to make every smaller group's event, there will be many new 
events it would be necessary for them to attend.  And, they will still 
need to attend those smaller group events if there are members of the 
populace that merit Kingdom recognition.

It's actually a rather finicky point.  I guess what I'm getting at is
that, while there may be reasons to point to for splitting into
principalities, decreasing the burden on the Crown is *not* a valid one. 
The Crown may even have more problems, dealing with three semi-autonomous,
semi-independent nations, all of whom have their own royalty, their own
quarrels, and their own ideas of how the game should be played.  You would
do better to base your arguments on more persuasive reasoning. 

Margaret

***********************************************************
Countess Margaret ny Connor  *  Lisa A. May               *
Barony of Bonwicke           *  Texas Tech School of Law  *
Kingdom of Ansteorra         *  Lubbock, TX               *
***********************************************************
     "And do as adversaries do in law, strive mightily 
               then eat and drink as friends."