No subject

Fri Apr 4 11:24:58 PDT 2014

Mistress Xene

-----Original Message-----
From: glaslyn-admin at ansteorra.org [mailto:glaslyn-admin at ansteorra.org]On
Behalf Of Scot and Michelle Henry
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 5:30 PM
To: glaslyn at ansteorra.org
Subject: [Glaslyn] FW: Missing 50 years (was:Re: [SCA-Dance] Repost:
country dance evolution)

I found this very interesting and thought some of the rest of you might as
well.

Is Signy one of ours?  Houston-area?

Capricia

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sca-dance at lists.andrew.cmu.edu
[mailto:owner-sca-dance at lists.andrew.cmu.edu]On Behalf Of Tracie Brown
Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2002 1:02 PM
To: sca-dance at andrew.cmu.edu
Subject: Missing 50 years (was:Re: [SCA-Dance] Repost: country dance
evolution)

   I consider this a pretty authoritative answer, since I was there and
involved when it happened.
   Until approximately 1980, all official publications of the SCA, Inc. sai=
d
the cut-off date was 1650.  All but one, and I'll get to that later.  What
the SCA asks for in costuming (and by extension, other areas) is a
"reasonable attempt" at pre-[cut-off date].  Because of the peculiarities o=
f
the 17th century calendar and the English copyright system (the Stationer's
Office), as well as the references to country dance in pre-1650 (indeed,
pre-1601) sources, anything in 1st edition Playford was considered a very
reasonable attempt at pre-1650 country dance, especially if done starting o=
n
the left foot.
   Just before I was elected to the Board of Directors, there was a complet=
e
Corpora (ie, Governing Documents) revision.  At my first Board meeting, I
looked at the revision that we were going to vote on and noticed that the
requirement to wear garb (i.e., a reasonable attempt at pre-1650 costume)
had been accidentally dropped.  (Remember ,at this point everyone, includin=
g
the Board, thought the cut-off date was 1650.)  No problem -- we would just
approved the revision as it was and add the garb requirement next meeting.
(In those days, we met monthly.)
   Well ... whoever wrote the text for the garb requirement went back to th=
e
Articles of Incorporation to get the correct cut-off date.  I'm not sure
why, because we all "knew" that it was 1650, but perhaps this person had
actually read the Articles and remembered something different.  (Indeed, th=
e
original draft (never filed) of the Articles said "pre-16th century", but
that was a typo.)  Anyway, the new paragraph was written with the actual,
real, official but completely overlooked pre-17th century (pre-1601) date.
    At the next meeting, I suggested that perhaps since pre-1650 had
appeared in so many official SCA publications, we might want to also issue =
a
Policy Decision explaining that (1) we were not actually changing anything
-- the date had alwaysofficially  been pre-17c, even if no one knew or
remembered it; (2) Pre-1650 had appeared in so many official SCA
publications that it was completely ingrained; (3) Since the corporation ha=
d
made this mistake, we would hereby consider a reasonable attempt at pre-165=
0
to constitute a reasonable attempt at pre-1601, since many SCA members had
made post-1601 but pre-1650 garb, danced dances, played music
(Praetorius!!), cooked food, etc. in good faith.
   Since I was the new girl on the block, I didn't get my way.  The other
members thought that people would be sure to understand without an official
explanation.  They didn't. ( It's a good thing there wasn't an Internet bac=
k
then.)  We got angry letters and phone calls in the middle of the night, we
got protest songs, we had the Queen of [Kingdom Deleted] announcing that
anyone wearing cavalier (i.e., post-1601) garb was a traitor the the Kingdo=
m
and the SCA (and she meant it!).  The publication of the pre-17th century
cut-off was widely interpreted as a change imposed by anonymous tyrants in
California.  (So what's new?)
   So that's where the missing 50 years went.
   BTW, the explanation I got, from the incorporators of the SCA, about
where 1650 came from was:  Master Edwin Berserk wanted to wear a kilt; the
earliest depiction of a kilt that he had found was a print of McKay's
regiment in the 1630s; ok, let's just cut the SCA period off at the end of
the English Civil War; well, how about rounding up to 1650.  I have no idea
why "pre-17th century" appeared in the Articles, or why the variying cut-of=
f
dates were not reconciled earlier, but they weren't.
    Personally, I think the cut-off date should  be 1603.  And I don't have
a problem with dancing 1st ed Playford dances (and even a couple "later"
ones, such as Sellinger's Round)  in the SCA, especially if they are taught
and performed applying as much historical evidence as we can find (Inns of
Courts, musical record, historical accounts, literary record, etc.)  I'll
start being hard-nosed about 1st ed Playford *after* we get rid of all thos=
e
icky GOOP dances, start dancing the period dances with some reference to th=
e
sources, stop seeing blue-jeans at events, even on new-comers, get rid of
the tacky plastic sunshades, portable garages and nylon roll-up chairs, sto=
p
serving iced-tea at feasts, etc. etc. <pant, pant, pant>

-- Signy

>From: sheilabb at earthlink.net

>I must be missing something here, please forgive me for
>not getting the point.
>
>ECD "officially" begins 1651 with publication of Playford I.
>SCA "officially" ends 1601.
>
>Has this 50 year gap been vaporized?
>
>I don't think anyone doubts that some of the Playford
>I dances have holdover antecedents in dances from, say,
>1590-1610, but ECD as WE know it and as PLAYFORD knew
>it didn't exist within the SCA's framework.
>
>Someone please kindly explain the error of my thought
>process here...
>
>thanks.
>
>
>Sheila Beardslee Bosworth      sheilabb at earthlink.net
>
>http://www.earlymusicboston.com
>for New England Early Music CALENDAR & BRS-West
>
>29 Main Street, Acton MA 01720-3505
>VOX  978/263.9926      FAX  978/263.2366
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get faster connections=A0-- switch to=A0MSN Internet Access!
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp

****************************************************************
To Unsubscribe send mail to sca-dance-request at andrew.cmu.edu
With the following body:
UNSUBSCRIBE sca-dance youremailaddress
****************************************************************

_______________________________________________
Glaslyn mailing list
Glaslyn at ansteorra.org
http://www.ansteorra.org/mailman/listinfo/glaslyn