[Ansteorra] RE: Provinces, a clarification

[Marc Carlson]

>From: "Paul DeLisle" <ferret at hot.rr.com>
>Umm..my intent was *not* to play games with terms, or definitions; but to
>discuss *concepts*.
>Do you have a valid point to present?

I believe that Emma’s point was adequately presented, and is quite valid.  
The development of non-manoral urban centers and communities was in fact a 
medieval concept – and arguably far more important to the development of 
European civilization than “feudalism” since with out the development of the 
communes and the Urban Corridor were critical to trade.  Without the Italian 
city states, the White Company would have had no one to sack.  The concept 
of a community run by the community, and not by the nobility, but still 
subject to the Crown, is a very medieval Concept.

It is unfortunate that the “Province” model doesn’t appear to merge neatly 
into a quaint Victorian romantic idea of the Middle Ages.  If you don’t care 
for it, that’s fine.   If it doesn’t fit into –your- personal idea of the 
Middle Ages, fair enough. But please don’t say it’s because it’s not a valid 
medieval concept, because the facts are against you on this.

Marc/Diarmaid

---------------------------------
>>-Emma de Fetherstan
>Not necessarily! The history of urban town governments is a fascinating 
>one,
>even if you limit it just to England (which, being in the SCA, we should
>not). The SCA term "province" is perhaps not the best term to use, but 
>isn't
>that also very typical of the SCA, where Knights outrank Lords?