[Ansteorra] Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 74
Ruth Rolston
lrolston at hot.rr.com
Tue Jan 15 08:26:42 PST 2008
I wandered what happened to that message I sent to my church secretary.
Sorry, you folks are probably wondering what a pastor has to do with the
SCA. I would, too. Indulge me, please.
----- Original Message -----
From: <ansteorra-request at lists.ansteorra.org>
To: <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 2:57 PM
Subject: Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 74
> Send Ansteorra mailing list submissions to
> ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ansteorra-request at lists.ansteorra.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> ansteorra-owner at lists.ansteorra.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Ansteorra digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: brass hats (willowdewisp at juno.com)
> 2. Re: Brass hat (willowdewisp at juno.com)
> 3. Re: Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 73 (Ruth Rolston)
> 4. Re: What was your favorite event? (David Whitford)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:54:12 GMT
> From: "willowdewisp at juno.com" <willowdewisp at juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] brass hats
> To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> Message-ID: <20080114.135412.3336.0 at webmail03.vgs.untd.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> I agreed you about adopting medieval values into our real life. Many of us
> are attracted to the SCA because those values mean a lot to us, but I
> think it is personal choice And shouldn't be the purpose of the SCA.
> Part of what I have been saying is an warning. When an individual declares
> they don't do history they are "living the SCA" they should not be
> surprised when their whole life becomes subject of talk. We can't have the
> privacy of a on game -off game situation or we can have the openness of
> life style community.
> The historical reality of the "the Dream" or the "reality of Ansteorra"
> allows us to distance ourselves from other people in the groups. Allows us
> to let the people we really care about become our real personal friends. I
> also allows us to distance ourselves from the politics that seems to go
> along with all social clubs. The acceptance of the SCA as a way of life
> makes every things personal and very serious. Persona becomes a dangerous
> thing to play. Even adopting period values become dangerous. Slowly we
> become more and more mundane until people cannot really tell the
> difference between everyday life and the SCA.
> We become a club were we may or may not learn things, wear funny clothes
> and hang out with our friends. There are many clubs that do that and you
> don't have to wear funny clothes. We stop recruiting because we do not
> offer anything special. In the old days we studied history by recreating
> pre 17th events. We offered the grandeur's of a romance and the excitement
> of action. We could be bigger than life. We could be heroes and we could
> shine. Of course we needed to take everything with a grain of salt when we
> wore working to set up events. People played their parts and we could
> watch history unfold. It was a lot of fun.
> Everyone didn't play every time or everywhere. There were a lot of people
> who just came to take classes, have discussions and hang out with friends,
> but at the same time they were doing this they could watch the action
> around them. There were candle light feast and campfires, bards and
> performers, fighters doing courtly things on the field and lots of other
> things.
> The new format is very modern and somewhat boring. There seem to be a lest
> creativity and much more personal feelings getting hurt. There is more
> politic because people are fighting for a life style not a chance to
> create part of the magic.
> Willow de Wisp
> 110391
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Make nail fungus a thing of the past by clicking here now!
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iiepcJltckiq1qjDJDencJdE7D7RjQgsKyhYWNmOBecItZoSN/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:59:10 GMT
> From: "willowdewisp at juno.com" <willowdewisp at juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Brass hat
> To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> Message-ID: <20080114.135910.3336.1 at webmail03.vgs.untd.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> My mother Lady Eliaabeth of Brandbust, one of the eariest members of the
> area now Ansteorra, used to say "The is not one truth because real truth
> is so complex that it can not be put in one viewpoint." Add what Mistress
> Aledwulf said to what I said and what you said.
> willow
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Make nail fungus a thing of the past by clicking here now!
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iiepcKJmzcoUQwGG1YzDfxNlld6ou7Y7zMryxBDFDKluYPHOJ/
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:02:48 -0600
> From: "Ruth Rolston" <lrolston at hot.rr.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 73
> To: <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
> Message-ID: <002101c856e8$6f875280$7e4fb248 at ruth>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Shirley,
> On to the business at hand. You will remember I erased all my stuff.
> Could
> you send me a copy of the letter we sent out to Pastoral Candidates this
> time last year? We are starting our work with the Taylor Group. Thanks.
> Ruth
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <ansteorra-request at lists.ansteorra.org>
> To: <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 1:43 PM
> Subject: Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 73
>
>
>> Send Ansteorra mailing list submissions to
>> ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> ansteorra-request at lists.ansteorra.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> ansteorra-owner at lists.ansteorra.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Ansteorra digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: Transparency. was CLOSED MEETINGS (Elizabeth Blackthorne)
>> 2. Re: Performance event (was Bards, Brewers, and Cooks (now
>> with shopping!) ) (Michael Gunter)
>> 3. Re: Regions and thier population base (ksullivan6 at cox.net)
>> 4. Re: Transparency. was CLOSED MEETINGS (David Whitford)
>> 5. Re: Closed Meetings (george basore)
>> 6. Re: Transparency. was CLOSED MEETINGS (Robert Fitzmorgan)
>> 7. Re: Closed Meetings, cont. (george basore)
>> 8. Chivalric fighting at Candlemas (michael young)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:15:08 -0600
>> From: "Elizabeth Blackthorne" <eblackthorne at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Transparency. was CLOSED MEETINGS
>> To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
>> Message-ID:
>> <e9159a790801141115u2b75f31ahd7a35078abdb7f40 at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>> Your Grace,
>> I can speculate on that answer and it makes sense. It is hard to get all
>> of
>> these people together because our Kingdom is so large. These officers
>> were
>> most likely going to be there anyway, so it makes the most sense to get
>> business accomplished when they will be together than to try to create a
>> new
>> place and time to do this that is convenient to everyone.
>> Just a speculation, this is in no way to be considered fact.
>> L.Elizabeth Blackthorne
>>
>> On Jan 14, 2008 1:05 PM, willowdewisp at juno.com <willowdewisp at juno.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> What I don't understand is why have it at King's Round Table. You invite
>>> all the officers to share their impute and then tell them you are having
>>> a
>>> "closed meeting". Isn't that like waving a red flag in front of a bull.
>>> As
>>> far as I know it is not necessary to publish these kinds of meetings so
>>> couldn't you have your "closed meeting" someplace where no one will
>>> notice?
>>> willow
>>>
>> --
>> Plant a tree...We have more paperwork!
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:18:24 -0600
>> From: Michael Gunter <countgunthar at hotmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Performance event (was Bards, Brewers, and
>> Cooks (now with shopping!) )
>> To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
>> Message-ID: <BAY121-W3319147D4C1C93A1725D00DF460 at phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>
>>> The Bardic Competition is held during the evening feast,
>>>with the specific goal that their bardic champion (Troubadour)
>>>be one who can command the attention of the table for > which they are
>>>performing, above the noise of the crowd,
>>>other performers, and through the distraction of courses being
>>>served. The bards who have won, rose to this challenge in
>>>spectacular fashion.
>> That's exactly what I look for in a "True" bard.
>> Many, many, many years ago when I was knighted at the last
>> Steppes Warlord to be held at Camp Burnett of the fond memory,
>> I issued a bardic challenge. The challenge was for a bard to
>> be able to enter the main party place and do a piece so well
>> that the rowdy drunks shut up and listened. The prize was
>> a coin dating to the Second Crusade that was found in a
>> section of excavated wall in Jerusalem.
>>
>> A bard walked away with the coin as well.
>>
>>> I think you would enjoy it, too, > and I encourage you to attend later
>>> this year!
>> Sounds like fun. I'll have to pencil it onto my calendar.
>>> Zubeydah Jamilla al-Badawiyyah> Northern Region
>> Gunthar
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.
>> http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:20:33 -0500
>> From: <ksullivan6 at cox.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Regions and thier population base
>> To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
>> Message-ID: <20080114142033.AJAIP.4850.root at eastrmwml05.mgt.cox.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>>
>> Robin,
>> yes you are right the min # for a shire is 5 sustaning members.
>> the # for the 5 groups being desbanded are:
>> for 8/1/07
>> Adlersruhe 9
>> Am Loch 5
>> Blacklake 7
>> Crossrode Keep 6
>> Mendersham 8
>> And if you go back to '92 Am Loch is the only one who ever droped below
>> min. and that was just 1 report period the next report they where back to
>> min.
>> one of the stated reasons for disbanding these groups was membership .
>> Now
>> unless the membership #'s on the seneschal's page are wrong , they are
>> being held to a higher standard.
>> Alix
>> --
>> Work hard,keep the ceremonies,live peaceably, and unite your hearts.
>> (Hopi)
>>
>> ---- Jay Rudin <rudin at ev1.net> wrote:
>>> Alix wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > Well I have been watching the descusions on the size of the area
>>> > formerly known as the Western Region, all the comments have been
>>> > on the acutal land of the area combaried to the other Regions, so I
>>> > thought I would look at the population bases of the Regions and
>>> > the number of SCA memberships in each Region.
>>>
>>> That may be a fun game, but it won't change the actual rules. Branch
>>> requirements are not based on a per-capita basis. Only the SCA people
>>> count. The hundreds of thousands of people who aren't in the SCA have
>>> no
>>> effect on branch status, for obvious reasons.
>>>
>>> > For the population base I used the numbers on a web site called
>>> > city-data.com.the SCA member # are from the Ansteorran web site
>>> > the # from Aug 07.
>>> > Here is what I found.
>>> > Central has 452 SCA members and a population base of 4,159,371 this is
>>> > a
>>> > per capita of 11 members per 100k
>>> > Coastal has 430 SCA members and a population base of 2,699,390 this
>>> > is
>>> > a
>>> > per capita of 16 members per 100k
>>> > Northern has 466 SCA members and a population base of 1,440,981 this
>>> > is
>>> > a per capita of 32 members per 100k
>>> > Southern has 409 SCA members and a population base of 2,429,883 this
>>> > is
>>> > a per capita of 17 members per 100k
>>> > Western has 106 SCA members and a population base of 835,511 this is
>>> > a
>>> > per capita of 13 members per 100k
>>> > Now some of you are going to say that Western does not have viable #
>>> > 's
>>> > well acording to Capora a Knigdom need 400 members a principality
>>> > needs
>>> > 100 a Barony 25, shires and cantons need 5.
>>> > Now just because I thought it would be intersesting I took the numbers
>>> > one step further, and took the membership #'s and pop base #'s for
>>> > Crossroadkeep and took that per capita to see what other groups should
>>> > have as memberships if they had the same per capita memberships ,here
>>> > are
>>> > just a few,
>>> > Elfsea 358 they have 141
>>> > Stepps 893 they have 117
>>> > Staregate 708 they have 115
>>> > Northkeep 138 they have 115
>>> > Bjornsborg 428 they have 105
>>> >>From the numbers is appears that the Western Region is being held to a
>>> >>higher standard of memberships.
>>>
>>> Not at all. You can't change the requirements and then draw any
>>> conclusions from that.
>>>
>>> You have documented that the Western region has roughly 1/4 as many
>>> members
>>> as any other region, and fewer people than several baronies. Look at
>>> the
>>> actual count, not the "per-capita" figures. You have also documented
>>> that
>>> the other region in a similar situation, the North, has more than met
>>> the
>>> challenge, maintaining more than twice as many members per capita than
>>> the
>>> rest of us. With no major metropolitan areas, they nonetheless maintain
>>> four baronies and a province. Nobody else is even close. Vivat
>>> Nordsteorra!
>>>
>>> If you wish to maintain that the requirements are harder to meet in less
>>> populous areas, well, of course -- nobody ever suggested otherwise.
>>> Yes,
>>> it's harder to maintain numbers in a smaller population. Bordermarch
>>> has
>>> struggled with this problem for decades. But that doesn't mean they are
>>> held to a "higher standard"; it means the standard won't be lowered.
>>> There's no branch in Quinlan, Texas for exactly this reason. Elfsea was
>>> a
>>> shire for years while Steppes was a barony because it takes longer to
>>> build
>>> in a smaller population pool. Now they've passed us in membership.
>>> They
>>> didn't need lowered standards; they met the challenge and surpassed
>>> their
>>> elder sister.
>>>
>>> The minimum remains 5 sustaining members for a shire and 25 sustaining
>>> members for a barony, and the standard remains sufficient qualified
>>> officer
>>> pools and meeting the reporting requirements.
>>>
>>> Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ansteorra mailing list
>>> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>>> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:27:51 -0800 (PST)
>> From: David Whitford <dbw6969 at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Transparency. was CLOSED MEETINGS
>> To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
>> Message-ID: <188425.94368.qm at web30109.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>>
>> In the court system the duties and rights off the
>> baliff are defined. The judge can also have everyone
>> removed from the gallery for sensative testimony. A
>> court is not an open meeting.
>> R
>> --- bsmall at suddenlink.net wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> ---- David Whitford <dbw6969 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> > You suggest have a Sgt at Arms to inforce a quiet
>>> rule
>>> > and/or remove disruptive elements, yet by the very
>>> > reasoning you feel you should be allowed into the
>>> > meeting then sgt at arms has no right to remove
>>> you.
>>>
>>> There's nothing wrong with that logic. In the real
>>> world, there are public trials, are you suggesting
>>> that the judge shoudn't have the right to have the
>>> bailiff remove disruptive elements? It happens all
>>> the time and no one seems to have a problem with
>>> that. Why should this be different?
>>>
>>> Ansgar
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ansteorra mailing list
>>> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>>>
>> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
>> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:29:05 -0800 (PST)
>> From: george basore <murray_kinsman at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Closed Meetings
>> To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>> Message-ID: <569071.93111.qm at web35209.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>>
>> Dear Gentles of Ansteorra,
>> I have been following this thread closely, and it
>> seems to me that some people have misunderstood the
>> situation.
>> In explaining that some metings require being closed
>> due to sensitive information being involved, Master
>> Phelim Gervase tried to expain that such information
>> REQUIRES that the meeting in question be losed, due to
>> stipulatios covered in the Privacy Act
>> (ie. Federal Law). He also pointed out that the ,non-
>> sensitive, financial and other information WILL be
>> made public shortly thereafter.
>>
>> This issue is aready turning into a tempest in a
>> teapot,needlessly.
>> Folks, we all need to step back, take a deep breath,
>> and and think about this carefully.
>> It is not a matter of the information
>> "inconvenient".
>> The information REQUIRED
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
>> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
>> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 6
>> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:29:32 -0600
>> From: "Robert Fitzmorgan" <fitzmorgan at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Transparency. was CLOSED MEETINGS
>> To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
>> Message-ID:
>> <52f0db3e0801141129j645b582ew53f06c5bafb48daa at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>> So there are times when closed meeting are appropriate? So who gets
>> to
>> decide if this is one of those times? I would suggest the people who
>> have
>> the information and know what is going to be discussed are in a better
>> position to decide than those who do not know what is going to be
>> discussed.
>> As someone who has held several offices, there have been times when I
>> was privy to other peoples private information, and I was obligated to
>> respect their confidence. There have been several times when I had to
>> discuss with other officers things which cast some people in a bad light.
>> I
>> prefer to to do that in private when possible.
>> Some things have to be handled in a private meeting. Some things are
>> better handled in a private meeting. And some things should be handled
>> publicly.
>> That being said I feel that secrecy should be used sparingly. My
>> experience in the SCA is that some people have a bad reaction to secrecy.
>> At times when some are feeling distrust of their leadership, secrecy can
>> often create more problems than it prevents. It's always a judgement
>> call.
>>
>> Robert Fitzmorgan
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 14, 2008 10:40 AM, Richard Yeager <chuymonstre at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It is obviously not about transparency if the proceeding are closed. As
>>> I
>>> indicated earlier. It may be more convenient for the officials
>>> involved.
>>> And the end product may be "presented" to the public later. It is
>>> still
>>> a
>>> very poor business practice for a non-profit organization. You can
>>> announce
>>> that no questions or comments will be allowed from non-GOofS members.
>>> Even
>>> have a "Sargent at Arms" to enforce the no questions rule. But at least
>>> the
>>> process is held in the open where all of the discussion and arguments
>>> can
>>> be
>>> seen. Otherwise you will always have the suspicion of "What were you
>>> hiding?"
>>>
>>> I have heard from several officers (Baronial and Kingdom) lately talk
>>> about not holding some discussions publicly because "things will get out
>>> of
>>> hand". Will some people go off on weird tangents or possibly bog things
>>> down with what the officers feel are irrelevant? Possibly. Hell,
>>> Likely.
>>> That can still be handled diplomatically and things can be kept
>>> functioning. Is it more of a pain for the people holding the
>>> discussions
>>> or
>>> making the decisions? Absolutely, at least initially. But it may save
>>> other problems in the long run. Other than the reasons previously
>>> stated, I
>>> can think of no reason that ANY discussions are held behind closed
>>> doors.
>>> Even if most of us have no choice but to accept the decision made by
>>> others
>>> in those discussions.
>>>
>>> We may be trying to re-create a medieval setting where sovereigns and
>>> landed nobility could make decisions affecting the population at large,
>>> without concern about informing the populace of the decision-making
>>> process.
>>> The reality of the situation is that we are a member-supported
>>> organization. As much as the crowns and nobles might wish, they cannot
>>> have
>>> irritating elements of the populace sanctioned for disagreeing with
>>> them.
>>> Convenience, expediency, and officer comfort aside, as members we have
>>> a
>>> right to know what is being discussed and why.
>>>
>>> Cuan
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> "If you haven't found something strange during the day, it hasn't been
>> much
>> of a day." John A. Wheeler
>>
>> Fitzmorgan at gmail.com
>> Yahoo IM: robert_fitzmorgan
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:38:18 -0800 (PST)
>> From: george basore <murray_kinsman at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] Closed Meetings, cont.
>> To: ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>> Message-ID: <455097.59737.qm at web35212.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>>
>> Sorry about the interruption, my computer sometimes
>> has too many moving parts.
>>
>> As I was saying, some information is REQUIRED by law
>> to be protected from public dissemination needlessly.
>>
>>
>> Ld. Robert Haddock
>> (MKA, George A. Basore, Sr., US Navy, retired)
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
>> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 8
>> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:43:45 +0000
>> From: michael young <uther42 at hotmail.com>
>> Subject: [Ansteorra] Chivalric fighting at Candlemas
>> To: ansteorra ansteorra <ansteorra at ansteorra.org>
>> Message-ID: <BAY111-W11D9CABECF6C3D5DBEDD8BB7460 at phx.gbl>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>>
>>
>> To celebrate the new found peace between the Saxons and the Danes a
>> series
>> of Chivalric "Friendship Games" are planned at Bryn Gwylad's Candlemas
>> Event:
>>
>> Demonstrations of Individual Prowess:
>>
>> This will be similar to a "bear pit" format, but with several timed
>> segments fought in different weapon styles of the period including short
>> spear and round shield, ax/mace and round shield, slashing spear
>> (unpadded
>> glaive) and whatever other styles strike the fancy of the Marshal in
>> Charge.
>>
>> Demonstrations of Group Prowess:
>>
>> Saxons vs the Danes in match of Ogre Ball. In the spirit of the event,
>> early period weapon/shield styles are strongly encouraged, but not
>> required.
>>
>> Demonstrations of Brotherly Love:
>>
>> "I went to a Saxon melee and a feast broke out..." In this melee
>> scenario, all combatants will begin seated at tables. All weapons larger
>> than a dagger will begin the melee "sheathed". Any Shields or two handed
>> weapons will begin the melee placed at the edge of the fighting field
>> (walls of the feast hall). Any Feast table item--food, eating daggers,
>> goblets, serving trays, etc that can be made chivalric combat legal and
>> safe will be allowed. Please be creative and have fun.
>>
>> I hope to have this be a relaxed and fun day of fighting. I strongly
>> encourage all fighters to adopt a Danish or Saxon fighting persona for
>> the
>> day. Round shields and short spears will be available to borrow. Bring
>> gauntlets if you have them.
>>
>> Feel free to e-mail me with any questions.
>>
>> Uther
>> Chivalric fighting coordinator
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Make distant family not so distant with Windows Vista? + Windows Live?.
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/digitallife/keepintouch.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_VideoChat_distantfamily_012008
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ansteorra mailing list
>> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>>
>>
>> End of Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 73
>> *****************************************
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:57:39 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Whitford <dbw6969 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] What was your favorite event?
> To: "Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc." <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
> Message-ID: <866802.82703.qm at web30101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Bet I know where to find some....
> Robert
> --- Rebecca Bevel <rebevel at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I hope not!
>> Rebekah
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Chiara Francesca"
>> <chiara.francesca at gmail.com>
>> To: "'Kingdom of Ansteorra - SCA, Inc.'"
>> <ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org>
>> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 11:52 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra] What was your favorite
>> event?
>>
>>
>> > My favorite event has to be one of the many
>> weekends we had running the
>> > Fight the Knight game at Ren Faire in the 80's.
>> Working the game was such
>> > incredible fun. It was non-stop crowds and lots of
>> laughing at our very
>> > young selves. :)
>> >
>> > Anyone got pictures of those times by any chance?
>> >
>> > Chiara Francesca
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Ansteorra mailing list
>> > Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>> >
>>
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ansteorra mailing list
>> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
>>
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
> http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra mailing list
> Ansteorra at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-ansteorra.org
>
>
> End of Ansteorra Digest, Vol 21, Issue 74
> *****************************************
>
More information about the Ansteorra
mailing list