CR - Central Principality

[Paul Mitchell]

Galen again!

Mike C. Baker wrote:
> 
> Galen, ol' bean, it looks as if you may have addressed most of my
> own reservations. (Check prior traffic, folks: never said I did NOT
> support a principality, now did I? <VBEGryn> Timing and expected
> prep work is another matter...)

I had noticed that...

And for the record, I objected to the principality idea last time
it was raised.  Because I didn't know who proposed it, nor for what
purpose.  This time I know.  And because it wasn't people in my
region saying "I want us to become a principality", but someone
else saying "y'all become a principality".
 
> Caveat to all: some of what I say in the following may sound peavish
> or confrontational -- please, be assured that I am only trying to
> speak from my convictions and knowledge and bear no ill-will toward
> Galen or to the proposal of pushing toward Principality. - Amra

Duly noted!
 
> To address a few of Galen's specific points, and give more body to
> one item or another:
> 
> ---Paul Mitchell <pmitchel at flash.net> (Galen of Bristol) wrote:
> > Mike C. Baker wrote:
> > > ---nolen dale <fairborn at swbell.net> wrote:<A bunch of stuff, mostly Amra agreeing with me, snipped>

> > My research last year led me to believe
> > that there is a _lot_ of support for this idea.
> 
> Galen, I haven't really seen much strength of support or depth of
> conviction at the root levels, the recently-arrived or younger folk
> who are still feeling their way into the SCA. May be a reflection of
> the people I've talked to more than a general sentiment, I grant
> you. But I can't say that the support runs all that deep based upon
> personal knowledge, and it is these newcomers who will be called
> upon to become future event workers and leaders...

My opinion is formed on the basis of the people I've talked to,
mostly early last year, a reasonably wide variety of folks.  Now,
let's make it a topic of widespread discussion, and see what the
Populace really wants.

<more snipped>
<Richard said:>
> > > > How can we make the job of an officer easier and more
> > > > pleasurable for all (big topic, but essential)<and Amra replied:>
> > > Absolutely. Better / more structure regional support?<and Galen said:>
> > Oh yeah.  These are all important.  And with the leadership of
> > a Prince and Princess, and the incentive of having them to please,
> > I believe these things will happen much more easily, and in more
> > rewarding fashion.<and Amra remarked> 
> Another set of potential danglies to seek out...

<now Galen answers:>
In the above remark, I wasn't actually talking about awards.  I
think most of us find it easier and/or more fun to feel loyalty
to a person rather than a group.  Knowing that you're doing a job
because "your Prince needs you" might be an easier incentive than
recognizing what needs to be done and digging in, and trying to
convince others to join in.  Especially for a big job.  We may not
be happy about it, but I think this is true.

<more snipped>

> > > > The central needs to start working together
> > Why?  When I was regional seneschal, I was bluntly told that the
> > region is not a branch, just an administrative convenience.  I'm
> > supposed to have loyalty to that?  Let's have a real SCA branch,
> > a principality, and I think you'll find crowds of people leaping
> > to work together.
> 
> Galen, frankly I think in terms of using what works elsewhere, and
> I've seen what is working in the North. There is a distinct regional
> identity which they should be able to convert into a Principality
> with no more than a (relatively) few hours work. Nordsteorra is not
> something that magically sprang into being overnight: long years of
> effort have gone into making Northern Region capable of working
> together consistently and over the long term.
> 
> Central does not have that "identity" established, and no particular
> basis upon which to pound out such an identity other than the
> boundaries of that "administrative convenience". Certes, should we
> be thrust into the position of sustaining a Principality I've no
> doubt that we could do so. For now, though, it is my personal belief
> that we could use some "seasoning" as a cooperative region before
> making the full leap... I Could Of Course Be Wrong.

Nordsteorra has geographic factors we can never have.  Its identity 
started because they were segregated away from the rest of the 
Kingdom, with many miles and a state line in between.

Here in the Central Region, we lack natural geographic borders, 
but we have a demographic factor that I think is compelling:
Steppes & Elfsea, with their Cantons and Colleges, is the largest
concentration of SCA members in Ansteorra by far.  Other nearby
shires wishing to be attached are, I think, fully welcome.  There
is also a unique geographic aspect to our area:  It's central.
This is where north meets south.  Folks from Stargate who _never_
go to Namron have friends there who never go to Stargate, because
they see each other at Steppes Warlord, Elfsea Defender, and Three
Kings.  The Baron of Namron is Defender of Emerald Keep.  (That's 
also why it's our events that are most often screwed up by peerage 
circles.)  We are at the Crossroads of Ansteorra.  That's who we are.  
We work hard and put on big events unlike any done elsewhere in the 
kingdom.  Too, we work hard on put on small events that evoke the
old SCA magic I knew when 75 people made a big event.
 
Now, I'm going to chop up Amra's next bit:
<Galen said:>
> > Llywelyn has suggested that the best vehicle to help the local
> > branches in the fashion that's been discussed is not a region,
> > but a principality.  If the region could do all these things we're
> > talking about, we'd have no need of a principality.  I believe
> > the region will never be able to do these things, but that a
> > principality would inspire the sort of loyalty, focus and incentive
> > that is necessary to the goal.<Amra answered:> 
> Darn it. Let me try and restate the matter this way: we've a region
> without a basis for identity other than administrative boundaries,
> and a possible proposed principality based for now on those same
> boundaries. 

I addressed this above.

> Without proof that the regional infrastructure can be
> made to work, 

Work to do what?  Remember the purpose of a region is to save 
effort for the Kingdom Officers.  It does that.

> how do we convince the populace that a Principality is
> good for them? 

We tell them the pluses and minuses and then ask them if
they think the benefits are worth the costs.

> How do we train / recruit competent staff for the
> requisite offices? 

I think being a Principality Officer will be a much
better-defined and more rewarding endeavor than being
a regional deputy.  With more visibility and better rewards,
I think more people will aspire to do those offices.

> Upon what basis do we petition the Crown, and the
> BoD?

We tell them that this is what we want.  If it should prove
that we do want this.

> If we had a clearly-definable geography to drive the issue, be it
> physical or political in nature, I'd waste less effort in advocating
> a slower course of development. 

We have it.  See above.  (Gee, I hope that paragraph above is
convincing; I'm sure hanging a lot of my argument on it.)

> If we had social structures in place
> which strengthened the sense of regional identity, I'd be more
> sanguine in aiding the push for early conversion to elevated status.

This would be a major _result_ (or, if you prefer, GOAL) of becoming
a principality.

> We don't, and we don't. Yet. And I fear that we have a *lot* of
> conservative, never-had-one, don't-need-one-now, residents in
> Central who would somehow consider themselves diminished instead of
> potentially enhanced by the addition of a principality.

Let's find out how many!
 
> > Here's another relevant question:
> > WOULD IT BE FUN TO HAVE A PRINCIPALITY?
> >             ^^^
> > I think it would be.
> 
> I am more than reasonably convinced that it could be a great deal of
> fun indeed. Might be even _more_ fun were we in Central Region to
> beat Northern Region to the punch, as it were...

I'm trying real hard to wish Nordsteorra well, and let them choose
their own path and timing, and not care what they decide for 
themselves.  But yeah, I agree they'd scandalized if we put in
a principality petition before they did.
 
> > My baron asked for suggestions of name and arms.  I note that no
> > SCA Kingdom or Principality has the horse as its totem animal.
> 
> Knock me over with a feather! I would have sworn that someone did...
> or am I remembering a unicorn as a supporter for one of the older
> SCA kingdoms? (Else an *avoidance* of horse as too similar to the
> unicorn and thereby too suggestive to some of fantasy elements...)
> 
> >  Well, this is Texas, and horses have been an integral part of
> > our economy and identity, just as in the middle ages.  I
> > suggest, "argent, a fess azure, overall a horse rampant gules,
> > and in base a laurel wreath vert."
> 
> I'd add a saddle blanket Or charged with an Ansteorran sable star to
> this design to convert it to an unofficial Principality battle
> standard, perhaps. (Not registerable -- too many layers).

And unnecessary.  Our principalty banner would almost always fly next
to an Ansteorran pennant.  We'll never become a kingdom.

> I'd like to see an emblazon...

It'd be a white background with a wide blue horizontal stripe across
the middle, and a red rampant horse filling the shield, and a green
laurel wreath down at the bottom.
 
> > The name should be something like "Equerria", "Equiterria",
> > or "Equestria".
> 
> Hmmm. Latinate basis. May be more in keeping with current proposals
> to tie more closely to Ansteorra by translation into Old English,
> but these three alternatives are not a bad place to start.
> 
> I'd appreciate feedback on my alternate proposal for heraldic stuff
> (device and name).
> 
> > My opinion.
> > - Galen
> 
> And we know you've always got one. (And you also present your
> arguments well, my friend -- it helps, it really does...)
> 
> Thanks, Galen. This isn't *quite* the direction I was expecting from
> my original suggestions & queries related to developing the Central
> Region, but I believe that it will be worthwhile making the journey
> to see what develops from these discussions.

A final point on development.  If you're trying to get more people,
or more experienced people, to visit the shires of the region, just
think for a minute how many people will accompany the Prince when he
visits one of those shires.  Especially when he's trying to encourage
their attendance.
 
> Adieu -- Amra / Pax ... Kihe / TTFN -- Mike

- Galen of Bristol

-- 
pmitchel at flash.net \ http://www.flash.net/~pmitchel
"The Constitution is a radical document ... it is the job 
of the Government to rein in people's rights." 
-- President Clinton, May 1994, MTV's "Enough is Enough."
============================================================================
Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.