principalities...et al...

[stddly at SHSU.edu]

Greetings to thee, Sir Lyonel!

I welcome your words, thoughts, and experiences to this discussion. We can all
use added information to assist us in formulating a clear picture of where our
path can take us. 

>(Sir Lyonel wrote...)

>Sir Kief,
>
>With all due respect, cousin, I think you've not given Aethelyan's words a
>fair read.  If I mispeak myself hear, my sincerest apologies, but you've
>offered no reasonable support for your counter claims (to wit:  "I feel
>that it would not be long, a few years at most, until one or more of the
>principalities would vie for Kingdom status.")  Upon what evidence do you
>base your claims?  More to thje point, if some portion of this kingdom is
>wont to "vie for Kingdom status" in the near future, then they must be
>unhappy with their current status.   Designating portions of a Kingdom
>"Principalities" should (as a number of respondents have already noted) in
>no way imply impending division.

With all respect returned, kinsman, I did read Aethelyan's words quite closely.
She, as always, is a rock of reason and stability. Everything the Good Mistress
stated is fact. I recognize it as such.

As to my claim of impending doom for the Kingdom, if we create principalities,
I base my predictions on what is evident in most of the newer and newly formed
Principalities and "large" Regions around the Known World. The older Kingdoms
and their Principalities had, usually, solid ground to build on. Shared
traditions and small populations that were stable and grew but slowly. I have
witnessed a nearly explosive growth in the past few years, a growth of new and
younger members. Not only here, but through out the Known World. Drakenvald
became a Kingdom but a few short years ago. The problem with Nordmark almost
tore them apart. Are they stable yet? Meridies recently formed a "named"
western region. Before the ink was dry on the papers there was a hue and cry
for principality...then on to Kingdom...raised. (Pardon my spelling on some of
these names...) Aethelmarc wishes to become a Kingdom but a very few years
after their elevation to Principality. Atenveldt once covered a huge amount of
territory...thence came Meridies, Ansteorra, Outlands, Trimaris, and soon,
perhaps Artemsia. The concern I have is not with the current populace. We are
all Ansteorrans and will remain Ansteorrans, principalities or no. But, 3-5
years from now, when most of the populace will be new (given the growth rates
we are currently experiencing) and members not of Ansteorra first. But members
of the principality first, with Ansteorra a distant second. (Sure, I know this
is a slippery slope argument...*smile*) I wish to remain Ansteorran, not part
of some new "administrative division", nor of a new Kingdom. I base my claims
on evidence gleaned from my travels around the Known World and from extending
current trends to a future point.

>Also, Sir Kief, you keep beating your "one star and one kingdom" drum as
>though desperately trying to drown out a contrary position.  No such
>position has been proposed in any of the missives I've seen in the past
>three days.

Well, I am rather strident... Desperate? Nope. I'll give something away here. I
shall probably not be as effective in my purpose in the future, but what the
heck. I _always_ take the extreme position. People react, think, write, solve
problems, and balance out the "extreme positions" toward the center. My aim is
to rile folks up. Have them bounce ideas off each other and post them here,
write them up in the _Black Star_, discuss them at events... In other words I
am a rabble rouser...*grin* Shucks, it got _you_ to write didn't it cousin?

>I've seen a few rather disturbing claims on this listserve in the past  few
>days, and (as a former Principality of Artemisia denizen) I would like to
>offer some clarification on a few matters. Principalities are still part of
>the same Kingdom.  As such:  Principalities still fight as segments of the
>same Kingdom at wars (albeit a better regimented portion, with the prince
>acting as a general for his King); Principalities offer a sense of
>belonging to groups in less centrally situated lands by offering visible
>representatives of the Crown in the form of the Coronets; Principalities
>increase the pomp, thereby improving the atmosphere generally;
>Principalities add another level of awards, thus providing greater
>recognition of growth; Principalities don't creat new officers, but
>Principality officers _do_  receive greater recognition for their efforts,
>which increases officer retention.

For the most part I agree with your statements. The point(s) I would like to
dispute are: 1. "Principalities still fight as segments of the same Kingdom at
wars (albeit a better regimented portion..." Have you ever seen the Ansteorran
army at a war? I've found after participating in 20+ wars that _nothing_
inspires respect (and sometimes down right fear) in our friendly enemies as our
massed units all clad in Gold and Black Star tabards... Principalities usually
have their own tabards and armory. This would divide our fighting forces into
visibly different groups, destroy their effect on our foemen... 2. Our
different units Light Cav., Heavy Cav., Shieldmen, etc. are drawn from all
portions of the Kingdom. Most receive rudimentary tactics and commands across
the Kingdom. It makes us a very effective fighting force. Our Knights and Royal
Family are, usually the generals, each in their own speciality... Training
under principalities would soon interrupt the cohesion we have on the battle
field, both in training/commands and visibly. The rest of your argument for the
formation of principalities is strong and well thought out. But the question
remains. Does Ansteorra _want_ or _need_ principalities?

>As a warrior, I found the organization offered by Principalities vastly
>superior to the catch-as-catch-can hodgepodge I found in my first Estrella
>Wars as a member of a loosely knit  region. 

I do believe that this one was rebutted above.

>Principalities _do_ create a
>larger number of important events, but the Crown need not (and usually does
>not) attend every Coronet list, investiture, A&S competition, and so forth.

Hmmmmm...I would think that the Crown would need to be every Coronet
Investiture. How else would the Prince receive the "Right" to be Prince but
from the hand of the Crown? Also, what better time to receive the Fealty due
from the Prince to the Crown? Most all of the Ansteorran Crowns, for the past
several years, have all traveled extensively. 'Tis my belief that
principalities would _increase_ the travel "burden". Our Crowns, like some few
others in the divers Kingdoms, feel the need to contact the populace as often
as possible, to see, hear, and experience the emotions and concerns of Their
folk. 

>As for the supposed need to subscribe to extra newsletters, pshaw.  We
>subscribed to the Principality of the Sun's newsletter for one year and
>found it to be a complete waste of money.  Important events always get into
>the Kingdom chronicle.

Having perused my usual stack of "other" Kingdom newsletters, I agree with you
wholly. Most all the Kingdom newsletters include a full schedule of
Principality events within their pages. 

>Not that I'm entirely sold on Principalities.  They have their negative
>aspects.  Most citizens will want to subscribe to their _own_
>Principality's newsletter, so you do have _one_ (small) added expense.
>Principalities increase the ratio of brasshats to non-brasshats.  This adds
>a certain degree of color, but it can become tedious in some instances.
>The down side of an extra level of award recognition comes with niggling
>peers.  Example:  say someone brings up Lady X as a candidate for
>knighthood in a peer circle.  Typically, someone (usually a knight who does
>not yet know Lady X) asks if Lady X has yet received the Kingdom level
>award for fighting.  If not, the Crown may consider such a level of
>recognition more appropriate than paying greater attention to grooming Lady
>X for the Chivalry.  If, on the other hand, Lady X lives in a Principality,
>the need for Principality-level recognition is often used as another layer
>of delay.  Personally, I find such practices tantamount to checklisting
>and, therefore, onerous, but it happens nonetheless.

Here we agree on most all points...even the odious practice you describe in the
latter portion of the paragraph (which I hope...is _never_ done here!)

>I realize that the history of the SCA includes quite a few situations in
>which Principalities (An Tir, Ansteorra, Outlands, etc) broke off as
>Kingdoms.  In each case, as in the impending division of Artemisia from
>Atenveldt, the geopolitical tensions that ultimately resulted in the
>division were present BEFORE THE PRINCIPALITIES WERE FORMED.  Ansteorrans
>generally strike me as quite proud of their Single Star heritage, and
>Ansteorra is certainly large enough to encompass three--nay,
>five!--Principalities.
>So, don't  think of it as division, think of it as organization and enrichment.

I wrote in an earlier paragraph about my perceptions of "new" principalities
and their ultimate ends... Ya, cousin, I do believe we are proud of our
heritage, Mother Atenveldt and all her children. True, we _are_ large, Texas
and Oklahoma have always been seen as "wide open spaces" We like it that way!
In my opinion we should improve our five Regions, perhaps even name them. I've
proposed (in other recent posts) Rotating Group Schedules, and other thoughts
that are designed to let the Kingdom become stronger and even more unified. In
my mind principalities lead to a weakening of the bonds of Sisterhood and
Brotherhood amoung the varied peoples of Ansteorra. _That_ is what I fear
losing most of all...our Unique and Singular strengths as a People, as a
Kingdom...under the banner of the single Sable Star.

At your service my Brother and in the Service of my Crown and Kingdom.

>In Service
>Sir Lyonel Oliver Grace,
>MP, Baron, Thane, etc.
>
>(currently living incognito in Bryn Gwlad)
>
>Dennis G. Grace
>Assistant Instructor
>Postmodern Medievalist
>Division of Rhetoric and Composition
>University of Texas
>
>Micel efel deth se unwritere
>                                        --Aelfric of York


Sir Arenvald Kief av Kiersted, Baron Raven's Fort (ret.), CSM, CIM, etc. 
LION of Ansteorra,


"Maleus Potius Clavo..."