MSCA (was: Re: MOA)

[Mitchell, Paul T]

Galen of Bristol here!

I'm going have to weigh in with Gunthar, here.  I agree with his statements 
of both
fact and opinion, quoted below.

To Dieter's reply, I would point out that:

 - Pre-Seventeenth Century England is not the model of the Chivalry of the 
SCA.

 - The Order of Knighthood (KSCA) is obviously based on Victorian ideas about 

King Arthur's Knights of the Round Table.

 - The Order of Mastery of Arms (MSCA) was made up whole, but I have seen
period references to the term "Master of Arms".

I do agree with Dieter that it is good that we renew our oaths each reign, 
and
that it should be done in such fashion that those gathered can bear witness
to the contract (as I do not speak or understand Finnish, Axel shouldn't 
call
me to help out in a dispute over what is or is not covered in his Oath of 
Fealty).

And while it may be fun to discuss, it really isn't relevant to point out 
how inauthentic
our system is.  It won't be changing.  We all heard the King Arthur stories, 
and
that's what most of us want.

 - Galen of Bristol, KSCA
Paul.T.Mitchell at lmtas.lmco.com (wk)
pmitchel at flash.net (hm)

"Auf wiedersehen fur jetzt" -- That's "ta-ta for now", right?

 ----------
From: ansteorra at eden.com
To: Mitchell, Paul T; ansteorra
Subject: Re: MSCA (was: Re: MOA)
Date: Thursday, June 05, 1997 10:57AM

Sir Gunthar wrote:

>Wearing the chain on the belt because you have a problem with the current
Crown is
>insulting to the extreme.  One common misconception, even among the
knights, is
>that you swear fealty each time there is a new Crown.  A knight swears 
fealty
>ONCE.  That during the ceremony in which they are knighted.  The knight's
oath is
>to the Crown and lands of Ansteorra and to whomever is the rightful ruler.
The
>fealty ceremony is simply a reaffirmation of that oath.  There have been
Kings
>to whom I did not reaffirm my oath to for various reasons but I was no less
a
>Knight of Ansteorra nor did I consider myself out of fealty.  Had the King
>commanded me, I would have obeyed.

>Yers,
>
>Sir Gunthar Jonsson                      "It is better to lose well than
>Kingdom of Ansteorra                               to win badly."

Good Sir,

This subject happens to correspond with a bit of homework I have been doing
of late and I must disagree with you.  Knights in period (England, our
model) swore to each *man* who wore the crown because it was more than just
a pledge of allegience.  Not only that, but the oath of fealty was a yearly
ordeal for most even when the crown/baron did not change.  The barons
demanded it and in their society it was for good cause... everyone *saw* you
give your word... everyone *heard* the contract between you and the
king/baron.  Not to put my knight on a pedestal, but those who were at
Ansteorran court at Gulf War this year saw **exactly** how fealty was done
in period(although Axels was in Finnish the language differed from region to
region;P)- to each king, and in a way that no person could doubt what was
said and what each man expected from the other.

In my opinion, knights SHOULD swear fealty to each king so as to set the
contract of not only what you owe *him* but more importantly what he owes
*you*.

Auf Wiedersehen fur jezt,

Dieterich



 ----------
Received: from quest.lmtas.lmco.com by smtpgate.lmtas.lmco.com
        with SMTP (AlisaMail M05.1-000)
        id SINN.2440177 at smtpgate.lmtas.lmco.com ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:52:03
 -0500
Received: from marble by quest (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
        id KAA09041; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:52:39 -0500
Received: from natasha.eden.com (natasha.eden.com [199.171.21.14]) by marble
(8.8.3/8.8.2) with ESMTP id JAA07684 for <Paul.T.Mitchell at lmtas.lmco.com>;
Thu, 5 Jun 1997 09:53:03 -0600 (MDT)
Received: (majordom at localhost) by natasha.eden.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA16654
for ansteorra-outgoing; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:28:23 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ns.vvm.com (ns.vvm.com [204.71.94.1]) by natasha.eden.com
(8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA16647 for <ansteorra at eden.com>; Thu, 5 Jun
1997 10:28:20 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from cjw.vvm.com (k1slip144.vvm.com [204.71.95.182]) by ns.vvm.com
(8.8.5/8.8.4) with SMTP id KAA01324 for <ansteorra at eden.com>; Thu, 5 Jun 
1997
10:28:07 -0500
Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19970605152342.0068c8c8 at vvm.com>
X-Sender: cjw at vvm.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 10:23:42 -0500
To: ansteorra at eden.com
From: Dieterich <cjw at vvm.com>
Subject: Re: MSCA (was:  Re: MOA)
Sender: owner-ansteorra at eden.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ansteorra at eden.com

 ----------