[Ansteorra] Royalty - Same Sex Consorts
Chris Zakes
dontivar at gmail.com
Mon Oct 31 04:34:11 PDT 2011
At 10:27 PM 10/30/2011, you wrote:
>On Oct 30, 2011, at 20:52, Tim McDaniel <tmcd at panix.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 30 Oct 2011, bsmall at suddenlink.net wrote:
> >> Of course this brings up the interesting question of what might
> >> happen should we have a Queen/Queen reign. ... Would there be 2
> >> tournaments, one for each Sovereign?
> >
> > A terminology note: the Glossary in the SCA Governing Documents
> > defines
> >
> > Sovereign and Consort: The victor in the Royal Lists and the
> > victor's consort, respectively, after their Coronation or
> > Investiture.
> >
> > So by this definition, there would be exactly one Sovereign (the
> > winner of Crown Tourney) and one Consort (the one for whom they
> > fought).
> >
> > Daniel de Lindo
>Why nitpick the terminology, after all couldn't that be changed if
>corpora is changed? Why try to use what's currently in the documents
>to support changing them?
Yes, it would be possible to change Corpora to create co-sovereigns,
so that the person who won Crown Tourney was no more important than
the person they fought for. But I think that would be an even bigger
change to SCA culture than having same-sex rulers.
<shrug> Realistically, the Board can do anything they want, up to and
including changing the kingdoms into anarcho-syndicalist communes
where we take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for
the week; but all the decision of that officer would have to be
ratified at a special biweekly meeting, by a simple majority in the
case of purely internal affairs, but by a two-thirds majority in the
case of interkingdom issues. But doing *that* would make the SCA a
very silly place.
-Tivar Moondragon
More information about the Ansteorra
mailing list