Most number of times King/Queen?

[Insane Ranter]

What's the greatest number of times that someone has won the Crown List (in
any kingdom) or been a partner to one that has won it.........

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <ZfoE7.12605$bZ6.4...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com>,

Insane Ranter <n...@spam.luckie> wrote:
>What's the greatest number of times that someone has won the Crown List (in
>any kingdom) or been a partner to one that has won it.........

The record-holders, I suspect, are Duke James Greyhelm and
Duchess Verena of Laurelin, formerly of the West, now of An Tir.
I think the number of reigns is eleven.

Dorothea of Caer-Myrddin Dorothy J. Heydt
Mists/Mists/West Albany, California
PRO DEO ET REGE djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt

[Dovie Reynolds]

Insane Ranter wrote:

I believe his Grace Inman McMoore has won crown five times in
Ansteorra. I don't know if that's a record, but it sure impressed the
heck out of me. ;-)

Gwennydd of Dyfi

[WendyDodd]

In the Outlands, Artan Mac Ailin has the record with five reigns. The first
two were with Tara (now Berengara de Chinon), and the last three were with
Aziza al-Kashani. She's been Queen more times than anyone else in the
Outlands.

Countess Aindrea MacCullaich
al-Barran, Outlands

[Dovie Reynolds]

Oops! His Grace has won Crown six times. I missed one. I know it's
not the record ... but just in case he's reading the NG. Sorry, your
Grace. ;-)

Gwennydd of Dyfi

[Brianna Riordan]

How many times has Duke Jade of the West won? And Duke Brion and Duchess Anna,
formerly of Atenveldt, now of the East (Aethelmerc?)?

Aine

[Heather Rose Jones]

Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
> In article <ZfoE7.12605$bZ6.4...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com>,
> Insane Ranter <n...@spam.luckie> wrote:
> >What's the greatest number of times that someone has won the Crown List (in
> >any kingdom) or been a partner to one that has won it.........
>
> The record-holders, I suspect, are Duke James Greyhelm and
> Duchess Verena of Laurelin, formerly of the West, now of An Tir.
> I think the number of reigns is eleven.

I think you're confusing two different Western records: the eleven-reign
single-person record is Jade of Starfall -- James and Verena hold the
same-couple record at eight.

Tangwystyl

--
*********
Heather Rose Jones
hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu
*********

[Todd Rich]

Heather Rose Jones <hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>
>> In article <ZfoE7.12605$bZ6.4...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com>,
>> Insane Ranter <n...@spam.luckie> wrote:
>> >What's the greatest number of times that someone has won the Crown List (in
>> >any kingdom) or been a partner to one that has won it.........
>>
>> The record-holders, I suspect, are Duke James Greyhelm and
>> Duchess Verena of Laurelin, formerly of the West, now of An Tir.
>> I think the number of reigns is eleven.

> I think you're confusing two different Western records: the eleven-reign
> single-person record is Jade of Starfall -- James and Verena hold the
> same-couple record at eight.

> Tangwystyl

Plus, if I'm remembering right for Brion, (9), that puts him on top for
the most actual time on the thrones (9 reigns x 6 months per reign = 54
months) compared to Jade (11 reigns x 4 [average] months per reign = 44
months). Even if it is 8 for Brion, he still has the most time (48 to
44).
Torin

[Morgan Buchanan]

You all may find this link informative and interesting:

http://www.interlog.com/~kms/SCA/Royalty/

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <20011102001356...@mb-ca.aol.com>,

Brianna Riordan <anti...@aol.comnospam> wrote:
>How many times has Duke Jade of the West won?

That is true, Jade has reigned twelve times, so he beats out
James. However, Jade has switched Queens every couple of reigns,
so none of them comes near beating Verena.

Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt

[Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie]

In article <3BE23032...@socrates.berkeley.edu>,

Heather Rose Jones <hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >
> > In article <ZfoE7.12605$bZ6.4...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com>,
> > Insane Ranter <n...@spam.luckie> wrote:
> > >What's the greatest number of times that someone has won the Crown List (in
> > >any kingdom) or been a partner to one that has won it.........
> >
> > The record-holders, I suspect, are Duke James Greyhelm and
> > Duchess Verena of Laurelin, formerly of the West, now of An Tir.
> > I think the number of reigns is eleven.
>
> I think you're confusing two different Western records: the eleven-reign
> single-person record is Jade of Starfall -- James and Verena hold the
> same-couple record at eight.
>

Someplace in my foggy memory I recall James telling me it was six. He
won the Summits Principality tourney once also

Also I'm not 100% certain that Verena still lives in AnTir, I haven't
seen her in several years (they did split after moving to Ashland).

Ralg

--
Ralph Lindberg personal email n7...@amsat.org
RV and Camping FAQ http://kendaco.telebyte.com/rlindber/rv
If Windows is the answer I would really like to know what the question is

[Wilson Heydt]

In article <rlindber-2CBBF1...@news.fu-berlin.de>,

Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie <rlin...@kendaco.telebyte.com> wrote:
>In article <3BE23032...@socrates.berkeley.edu>,
> Heather Rose Jones <hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>> Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> >
>> > In article <ZfoE7.12605$bZ6.4...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com>,
>> > Insane Ranter <n...@spam.luckie> wrote:
>> > >What's the greatest number of times that someone has won the Crown List (in
>> > >any kingdom) or been a partner to one that has won it.........
>> >
>> > The record-holders, I suspect, are Duke James Greyhelm and
>> > Duchess Verena of Laurelin, formerly of the West, now of An Tir.
>> > I think the number of reigns is eleven.
>>
>> I think you're confusing two different Western records: the eleven-reign
>> single-person record is Jade of Starfall -- James and Verena hold the
>> same-couple record at eight.
>>
> Someplace in my foggy memory I recall James telling me it was six. He
>won the Summits Principality tourney once also

James and Verena also reigned as Prince and Princess of the Mists.

--
Hal Ravn Hal Heydt
Mists, Mists, West Albany, CA

"They didn't call him Erik Bloodaxe because he was good with children."
--National Geograhic, May 2000

[Wilson Heydt]

In article <lOoE7.9957$hO1.4...@typhoon.austin.rr.com>,

Not even close. I have a picture of 4 Dukes together who had *each*
won eight times, and one of them went on to win a ninth that day.

[David Friedman]

In article <GM6Kt...@kithrup.com>, whh...@kithrup.com (Wilson Heydt)
wrote:

> >I believe his Grace Inman McMoore has won crown five times in
> >Ansteorra. I don't know if that's a record, but it sure impressed the
> >heck out of me. ;-)
>
> Not even close. I have a picture of 4 Dukes together who had *each*
> won eight times, and one of them went on to win a ninth that day.

But remember, you are in the one kingdom in the Society that has three
kings a year. Everyone else has two. So one could argue that you ought
to treat each West Kingdom reign as only 2/3 of a reign elsewhere. I
suspect Jade still ends up with the record, but not by nearly as large a
margin.
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html

[Steven H. Mesnick]

Insane Ranter wrote:
>
> What's the greatest number of times that someone has won the Crown List (in
> any kingdom) or been a partner to one that has won it.........

Probably Brion & Anna (Tarragon) have the longest *aggregate
time on the throne* (as opposed to "number of reigns"). They
have had, what, ten reigns?

There are a number of Western dukes/duchesses with perhaps more
*reigns* (Jade, James) but Western reigns are shorter -- they
have 3 a year, as opposed to two a year in the rest of the Worlde.

Steffan ap Kennydd
East

[Anthony J. Bryant]

David Friedman wrote:

Is each time they WIN THE LIST only 2/3 of a win?

It's not time on the throne that counts, it's the number of times you've WON
the throne that is the major effort, for my money.

Effingham

[Anthony J. Bryant]

"Steven H. Mesnick" wrote:

It could only be a two-month reign and it would still be the same.

It's the number of times you fought the lists, the number of times you came out
on top, the number of times you WON the crown that is the achievement. Not the
number of months sitting on a throne, which could be good or bad or indifferent.

Effingham

[Wilson Heydt]

In article <ddfr-44D247.0...@sea-read.news.verio.net>,

That's a good point, but only part of the answer. We aslo tend to
have fairly large Crown Lists--up to 120--making our Lists consist
of more fights than average, so actually winning and getting to
reign may be tougher than average, even if the reigns are shorter.

[Todd Rich]

> Effingham

Ok, just curious here...say a new Kingdom starts up, and they are set up
to have a Crown Tourney/Coronation every weekend. You reign for a week
and the pass the crown on to the next winner. After a few years you have
some people who have won the crown 30-40 times. Would you view them the
same way you would Jade and Brion for doing what they did?
Torin

[Zebee Johnstone]

In rec.org.sca on 2 Nov 2001 21:24:18 GMT

Todd Rich <to...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>Ok, just curious here...say a new Kingdom starts up, and they are set up
>to have a Crown Tourney/Coronation every weekend. You reign for a week
>and the pass the crown on to the next winner. After a few years you have
>some people who have won the crown 30-40 times. Would you view them the
>same way you would Jade and Brion for doing what they did?

Do they have 100+ person lists?

A balancing act... what's more important:

- number of fights to win an individual crown tourney?
meaning that say a group which has 2 reigns a year but 20 fighters has
to be balanced against one with 12 a year and 300 fighters.

- nunmber of years you have been fighting to win this many crowns?
meaning that someone might have been fighting for 20 years and won 10
out of 20 they fought in a 3 per reign kingdom, Someone else fighting
10 years in a 2 per year kingdom won every one of the 10 they fought.
The first guy has more "experience" but is physically older.

Silfren

[David Friedman]

In article <3BE2F2D8...@indiana.edu>,

"Anthony J. Bryant" <ajbr...@indiana.edu> wrote:

> > There are a number of Western dukes/duchesses with perhaps more
> > *reigns* (Jade, James) but Western reigns are shorter -- they
> > have 3 a year, as opposed to two a year in the rest of the Worlde.
>
> It could only be a two-month reign and it would still be the same.
>
> It's the number of times you fought the lists, the number of times you came
> out
> on top, the number of times you WON the crown that is the achievement. Not
> the
> number of months sitting on a throne, which could be good or bad or
> indifferent.

That depends what you are measuring. Winning one tournament out of two
is a bigger achievement--i.e. harder to do, all other things being
equal--than winning one out of three. A top fighter in the west, who
remains a top fighter for (say) ten years, has thirty crown tournaments
to fight in (minus the ones where he is king); a similar figher
elsewhere has twenty.
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html

[Susan Carroll-Clark]

Greetings--

Here's a tangent: What was the longest gap between successive reigns, for
males, females, and couples?

What reminded me of this was the very long gap between Duchess Caitlin
Stuart's first reign in the Middle and her second one: fifteen years. Then
I remembered the long gap between Duke Tadashi's first reign (as Thaid) and
his second--seventeen years. Both of them reigned with different partners
each time.

Does anyone know of longer gaps? And who holds the record for longest gap
between reigns for a couple?

On a related note, anyone know who's reigned in the most kingdoms?

Nicolaa

[Anthony J. Bryant]

Todd Rich wrote:

If they each had to fight a couple of dozen people to win the crown, yes.

You will note that Corpora itself refers to the NUMBER of reigns, not the months
on the throne.

Effingham

[Andrew the Purple]

Personally, I consider the achievement to be _how_ they reigned. I don't
care how many times someone reigns, a bad king is a bad king, and a good
king is a good king.

--
purple
********************************
Visit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!
Freedom is hard. It is hard to love your country with your entire being and
yet speak out when you believe that its governmental policies are wrong. It
is hard for a government to hear the dissent of its own people and yet
realize that if the country is indeed truly to be based upon freedom that
this dissent must be heard. Freedom is hard. (Wren Walker)

[Heather Rose Jones]

Well, frankly, I think that the focus on who has won the most
sword-fighting tournaments (of whatever level) is misguided, except in a
"Guinesss Book of Records" sense. In my opinion, the _achievement_ is
stepping down from the throne with the kingdom in good order and the
populace looking forward to the next time you might sit there. Someone
could win twenty or thirty crown tournaments and not have "achieved"
anything worth talking about.

[Brian M. Scott]

>David Friedman wrote:

Not for mine. Winning the tournament is just winning a tournament --
a bigger tournament than most, with more good fighters and probably
more fighters who really, really want to win, but still just a
tournament. The real work starts after you win.

I should probably admit that in general I question the sanity and good
taste of anyone who seeks a third reign, unless perhaps it's to make a
duchess (or duke) of a permanent partner who wasn't his or her first
consort.

Talan

[Robert A. Uhl]

On Fri, 02 Nov 2001 14:24:09 -0500, Anthony J. Bryant
<ajbr...@indiana.edu> wrote:
>
> It could only be a two-month reign and it would still be the same.
>
> It's the number of times you fought the lists, the number of times
> you came out on top, the number of times you WON the crown that is
> the achievement. Not the number of months sitting on a throne, which
> could be good or bad or indifferent.

I think that you ignore two factors: a) the effects of time and b) the
effects of Dame Fortuna. For the first, I think it more than likely
that a series of daily tournaments would turn up runs of the same
winners time after time, with some variance. For the second, I
believe that there's a good deal to winning any competition which is
pure luck. And luck, I think, is inversely proportional to the number
of contenders.

So yes, I would consider a fellow who'd won crown in a kingdom of
three fighter for 17 weekends in a row something less than a guy who'd
won once in a kingdom of 10,000 with tournaments once a year.

Now, as for the relation at hand, where the fighter populations are
_very roughly_ similar and thus reign duration is the only major
variable, I've no idea, particularly.

Although there is the interesting question of What About Guys Who Hit
Their peak in Off-Months?

--
Robert Uhl <ru...@4dv.net>

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give
orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem,
pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently,
die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
--Robert Heinlein

[Robert A. Uhl]

On Sat, 03 Nov 2001 02:46:31 GMT, Andrew the Purple
<DRE...@techsanctuary.org> wrote:
>
> Personally, I consider the achievement to be _how_ they reigned. I don't
> care how many times someone reigns, a bad king is a bad king, and a good
> king is a good king.

Well said. OTOH, I believe that we, unless we figure a way to choose
kings irrespective of any merit at all (yes, even skill at bashing
fellows about the head with sticks is a merit of sorts) we will
continue to compare these sorts of statistics. `Well, Duke Edcgtheow
won seven times at chess, and once at lawn darts!' `But one must
consider that Count Rugen beat 700 comers at the rumpy-bumpy,
y'know...'

--
Robert Uhl <ru...@4dv.net>

There isn't a single useful thing that we in the CS community can come
up with that some @&%! marketer can't abuse. --devphil

[JE Anderson]

"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote in message
news:3be36013....@enews.newsguy.com...

<snip>

> I should probably admit that in general I question the sanity and good
> taste of anyone who seeks a third reign, unless perhaps it's to make a
> duchess (or duke) of a permanent partner who wasn't his or her first
> consort.
>
> Talan

Talan, don't forget there are people who honestly enjoy doing the job. It
is a hard job, but for some it is very rewarding. I don't mean rewarding in
the sense of gifts, but in the sense of personal satisfaction of doing the
job. It can be an amazing high to be able to grant awards to people, to
make their SCA experience a little bit better. Not all repeaters do it for
that reason but just keep in mind that some do...

Eirika

[Insane Ranter]

Robert A. Uhl wrote in message ...

>On Fri, 02 Nov 2001 14:24:09 -0500, Anthony J. Bryant
><ajbr...@indiana.edu> wrote:
>>
>> It could only be a two-month reign and it would still be the same.
>>
>> It's the number of times you fought the lists, the number of times
>> you came out on top, the number of times you WON the crown that is
>> the achievement. Not the number of months sitting on a throne, which
>> could be good or bad or indifferent.
>
>I think that you ignore two factors: a) the effects of time and b) the
>effects of Dame Fortuna. For the first, I think it more than likely
>that a series of daily tournaments would turn up runs of the same
>winners time after time, with some variance. For the second, I
>believe that there's a good deal to winning any competition which is
>pure luck. And luck, I think, is inversely proportional to the number
>of contenders.

Just remember that luck isn't blind random chance.

[Tanya Guptill (Mira)]

Tangwystyl wrote:

> Someone could win twenty or thirty crown tournaments and not have "achieved"
> anything worth talking about.

New question--in your time in the SCA, what are the most positive, moving,
inspirational deeds that you have seen a Monarch do? Do you have a memory of an event
that defines "kingly" or the best of what Sovereigns can do in the SCA?

Mira Silverlock

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sat, 03 Nov 2001 16:02:07 GMT, "JE Anderson" <eir...@home.com>
wrote:

>"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote in message
>news:3be36013....@enews.newsguy.com...

><snip>

>> I should probably admit that in general I question the sanity and good
>> taste of anyone who seeks a third reign, unless perhaps it's to make a
>> duchess (or duke) of a permanent partner who wasn't his or her first
>> consort.

>Talan, don't forget there are people who honestly enjoy doing the job. It

>is a hard job, but for some it is very rewarding. I don't mean rewarding in
>the sense of gifts, but in the sense of personal satisfaction of doing the
>job. It can be an amazing high to be able to grant awards to people, to
>make their SCA experience a little bit better. Not all repeaters do it for
>that reason but just keep in mind that some do...

I'm sure they do, and there are certainly worse reasons, but I still
don't really consider that a good reason. They should step aside and
let someone else have a go.

Talan

[Richard Macdonald]

"Insane Ranter" <n...@spam.luckie> wrote in message
news:XUVE7.5844$Go2.2...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...

>
> Just remember that luck isn't blind random chance.

Luck is primarily the ability to recognize and capitalize on the
opportunities provided by blind random chance.

--
Richard A. Macdonald, CPA/EA
SSG(Ret), USA, ADA 16P34
Gib mir Schokolada und niemand wird verletzt!!!

[Anthony J. Bryant]

"Brian M. Scott" wrote:

Ultimately that's the achievement, yes, but you're slipping too far away from
the original question, which was, "Who has won more crowns?" That's the question
I've been answering. Not "Who has been on the throne the longest"" or "Who has
had the most achievements as king?"

And in general I agree with your opinion on third reign seekers. Though there
are many mega-dukes I like and respect, When a mega-duke enters crown, it almost
automatically limits the chances for all others.

Effingham

[Anthony J. Bryant]

David Friedman wrote:

>
> That depends what you are measuring. Winning one tournament out of two
> is a bigger achievement--i.e. harder to do, all other things being
> equal--than winning one out of three. A top fighter in the west, who
> remains a top fighter for (say) ten years, has thirty crown tournaments
> to fight in (minus the ones where he is king); a similar figher
> elsewhere has twenty.

Well, that's a good point. A very good point.

But it also moves us farther away from just answering the original question. <G>

Effingham

[Earl P. Jones]

"Anthony J. Bryant" wrote:
>
> When a mega-duke enters crown, it almost
> automatically limits the chances for all others.

E.g., the six contestants in the finals of the last three West Kingdom
crown tournaments had a total of 26 previous crown victories between them.
One was only a count; the others were dukes with 3 or more previous reigns
each.

Owen ap Morgan

[Kaldking]

I can only speak for the 2 kingdoms I know:

For actual "East Kingdom" reigns, the highest I believe would be His Grace
Master Lucan von Drachenclaue who is currently on his 6th, although Duke Sir
Brion currently living in the East has more. (1 East and several Atlantian)

For AEthlmearc, His Grace Duke Sir Morguhn Sheridan has the most with 5 times
king and twice Sylvan Prince of AEthelmearc. (3 of the kingdom level reigns in
the East and 2 in AEthelmearc.) His reigns are also among the furthest apart,
I believe the first reign began in 1985 and the last ended in 2001- 16 years!

I am interested in finding out about the other kingdoms... and the question of
"What makes want to reign?" is also interesting.

Fiona

[Todd Rich]

Kaldking <kald...@aol.com> wrote:
> I can only speak for the 2 kingdoms I know:

> For actual "East Kingdom" reigns, the highest I believe would be His Grace
> Master Lucan von Drachenclaue who is currently on his 6th, although Duke Sir
> Brion currently living in the East has more. (1 East and several Atlantian)

It appears you have the wrong spelling of Atenveldt, he has reigned 8
times there as King, and once as Prince of Artemisia while it was part of
Atenveldt)

> For AEthlmearc, His Grace Duke Sir Morguhn Sheridan has the most with 5 times
> king and twice Sylvan Prince of AEthelmearc. (3 of the kingdom level reigns in
> the East and 2 in AEthelmearc.) His reigns are also among the furthest apart,
> I believe the first reign began in 1985 and the last ended in 2001- 16 years!

> I am interested in finding out about the other kingdoms... and the question of
> "What makes want to reign?" is also interesting.

> Fiona

Torin

[Anthony J. Bryant]

"Earl P. Jones" wrote:

.... sigh.

Effingham

[Kaldking]

Torin said:
>It appears you have the wrong spelling of Atenveldt, he has reigned 8
>times there as King, and once as Prince of Artemisia while it was part of
>Atenveldt)

Thanks for the correction!
Those darn "A" kingdoms do get tricky.
An Tir, Ansteorra, Artemisia, Atenveldt, Atlantia.... pardon my ignorance!

Fiona

[Todd Rich]

> Fiona

No problem. I was at a board meeting several years back when the
discussion of A kingdoms came up afterwards. Some comment to the effect
of, "The first kingdom proposal we get that their name starts with a Z
will be approved in 2 seconds flat" was made. Don't forget AEthelmarc
too.
Torin

[Robert A. Uhl]

On Sat, 03 Nov 2001 10:13:18 -0800, Tanya Guptill (Mira)
<tgup...@teleport.com> wrote:
>
> New question--in your time in the SCA, what are the most positive,
> moving, inspirational deeds that you have seen a Monarch do? Do you
> have a memory of an event that defines "kingly" or the best of what
> Sovereigns can do in the SCA?

Running into HM Outlands at Estrella late one evening. He was moving
about with a wain laden with a beer keg, bestowing beer and honours
upon the populace. My sort of king.

But I'm an odd sort:-)

--
Robert Uhl <ru...@4dv.net>

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

[JE Anderson]

"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote in message

news:3be42c80...@enews.newsguy.com...

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one :-). Crowns and Coronets
are a way of testing a fighter, if you keep removing the best fighters after
2 wins you destroy the integrity of the list because people are no longer
competing and/or testing their skills against the best. If you are not a
good enough fighter to get past the *best* available opponents then do you
deserve to win the tourney? I'm not saying yes or no...just musing.

Eirika

[Bruce Probst]

On Fri, 02 Nov 2001 17:29:17 GMT, "Steven H. Mesnick" <ste...@pobox.com>
wrote:

>Insane Ranter wrote:
>>
>> What's the greatest number of times that someone has won the Crown List (in
>> any kingdom) or been a partner to one that has won it.........

If the question is expanded slightly to include Principality lists, not just
Crown lists, then the number of "contenders" for the "top spot" must change
somewhat. Elffin of Mona, for example, won five(?) Coronet lists in Lochac
before he moved to Drachenwald. How many times has he been King there?

And for those interested in those sort of stats, Lochac has flip-flopped
between six-month reigns & three-month reigns (and back again).

Not that I'm sure what any of this *proves*, other than "gee, some folks
sure know how to fight" <g>.

Will

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bpr...@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759
"Why do you hate my groin so much?"
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ

[Bribroadax]

>Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one :-). Crowns and Coronets
>are a way of testing a fighter, if you keep removing the best fighters after

The big comment in the East kingdom was that a Duke only enters a crown tourney
to effect the outcome. As for Crown Tourney only bringing out the best
fighters, there are a lot of tourneys that do that. When a Duke told me that
the best way to win a tourney was to not worry about hurting the other guy just
hit him as hard as you can, I didn't care for that idea. Of course I've known
people who would crease 12 ga Stainless helms too. Not much excessive force
there huh?

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sun, 04 Nov 2001 05:23:21 GMT, "JE Anderson" <eir...@home.com>
wrote:

[...]

>Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one :-). Crowns and Coronets
>are a way of testing a fighter, if you keep removing the best fighters after
>2 wins you destroy the integrity of the list because people are no longer
>competing and/or testing their skills against the best. If you are not a
>good enough fighter to get past the *best* available opponents then do you
>deserve to win the tourney? I'm not saying yes or no...just musing.

Perhaps that's the difference right there: I consider the tournament
merely a way to pick the royalty -- a rather silly way, but one that's
firmly ingrained in SCA culture at this point. I really don't care
whether from a purely athletic point of view he deserves to win the
tourney. If someone who would make a good king but would not normally
be able to win crown happens to get lucky, so much the better.

Talan

[Brian M. Scott]

On 04 Nov 2001 07:19:45 GMT, bribr...@aol.com (Bribroadax) wrote:

> Of course I've known
>people who would crease 12 ga Stainless helms too. Not much excessive force
>there huh?

If anyone had ever creased my 12 gauge helm, I'd simply have refused
to fight him. I'd have hoped that his authorization would be pulled.

Talan

[Andrew the Purple]

> Crowns and Coronets
> are a way of testing a fighter, if you keep removing the best fighters
after
> 2 wins you destroy the integrity of the list because people are no longer
> competing and/or testing their skills against the best. If you are not a
> good enough fighter to get past the *best* available opponents then do you
> deserve to win the tourney? I'm not saying yes or no...just musing.
>
> Eirika

That implies that there is a static group of "good" possible royalty in any
one pool of fighters. If that's true, we would have run out long ago, there
were only what, 30 people at the first tournament?

--
purple
********************************
Visit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!

Last night I lay in bed looking up at the stars in the sky and I thought to
myself, "Where the heck is the ceiling?!"

[Lis Beaty-Schraer]

> New question--in your time in the SCA, what are the most positive, moving,
> inspirational deeds that you have seen a Monarch do? Do you have a memory of an event
> that defines "kingly" or the best of what Sovereigns can do in the SCA?

Yep.

More than a decade ago, I watched a king undo an ill-thought-out law
change a week later. In court, just before invoking the Crown Tourney
lists, he said something to the effect of "We all make mistakes, and
being up here doesn't make you immune from that...in fact it makes it
more likely. Recently I did something that hurt some people, and now
I'm going to fix it." And had the herald read the revision.

People who weren't "in the know" probably were slightly confused, but
from him I learned how a class act in a prominent position fixes an
error.

Elasait ingen Diarmata
Barony of Three Rivers, Kingdom of Calontir

[Lissa McCollum]

Sometimes it is the small things. My sister and I were unloading our
gear
for Estrella and carrying it to our camp. His (then) Royal Majesty Alan
Youngforest saw us, and slipped away from his duties long enough to
help carry a load for two ladies he didn't know. Nobody looking to
be impressed, he was just *being* the Dream.

*That* is a King.

Gwendolen Wold

[WendyDodd]

<<<On a related note, anyone know who's reigned in the most kingdoms?>>>

Duke Christopher of Hoghton ruled the West, Atenveldt and the Outlands. I
don't know if that is the record, though.

Aindrea
al-Barran, Outlands

[Anthony J. Bryant]

"Brian M. Scott" wrote:

Hear, hear.

I wonder if any king would have the cojones -- and the vision -- to announce
that the crown tourney to be fought during his reign would not allow those who
had already sat on the throne.

Effingham

[Todd Rich]

> Aindrea
> al-Barran, Outlands

Checking the webpage listed earlier in this thread, it looks like it is.
I stopped at the start of where there were only having won 3 crowns as it
would only tie, not beat that record.
Torin

[Andrew the Purple]

> >Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one :-). Crowns and
Coronets
> >are a way of testing a fighter, if you keep removing the best fighters
after
> >2 wins you destroy the integrity of the list because people are no longer
> >competing and/or testing their skills against the best. If you are not a
> >good enough fighter to get past the *best* available opponents then do
you
> >deserve to win the tourney? I'm not saying yes or no...just musing.

You're also assuming that because someone is the best fighter THAT DAY --
and in the MidRealm, lately, that's been beating somewhere between 6 and 10
opponents -- they are the best qualified PERSON to lead.

Now, I'd say we've been particularly lucky in the MidRealm. Many of our
kings and queens have been good ones.

--
purple
********************************
Visit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!

"Free speech is intended to protect the controversial and even outrageous
word; and not just comforting platitudes too mundane to need protection." -
Colin Powell

[Zebee Johnstone]

In rec.org.sca on Sun, 04 Nov 2001 21:51:29 GMT

Andrew the Purple <DRE...@techsanctuary.org> wrote:
>
>Now, I'd say we've been particularly lucky in the MidRealm. Many of our
>kings and queens have been good ones.

An interesting question... Is it luck, or is it likely?

What makes a bad king, and it is likely or not likely that such a
person will make it through the selection process?

Silfren

[JE Anderson]

"Andrew the Purple" <DRE...@techsanctuary.org> wrote in message
news:BLiF7.133070$P8.45...@news1.elmhst1.il.home.com...

> > >Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one :-). Crowns and
> Coronets
> > >are a way of testing a fighter, if you keep removing the best fighters
> after
> > >2 wins you destroy the integrity of the list because people are no
longer
> > >competing and/or testing their skills against the best. If you are not
a
> > >good enough fighter to get past the *best* available opponents then do
> you
> > >deserve to win the tourney? I'm not saying yes or no...just musing.
>
> You're also assuming that because someone is the best fighter THAT DAY --
> and in the MidRealm, lately, that's been beating somewhere between 6 and
10
> opponents -- they are the best qualified PERSON to lead.

Actually I am making no such assumption, just talking about winning the
tourney...big difference.

Eirika

[JE Anderson]

"Andrew the Purple" <DRE...@techsanctuary.org> wrote in message

news:XPdF7.132387$P8.45...@news1.elmhst1.il.home.com...

> > Crowns and Coronets
> > are a way of testing a fighter, if you keep removing the best fighters
> after
> > 2 wins you destroy the integrity of the list because people are no
longer
> > competing and/or testing their skills against the best. If you are not
a
> > good enough fighter to get past the *best* available opponents then do
you
> > deserve to win the tourney? I'm not saying yes or no...just musing.
> >
> > Eirika
>
>
> That implies that there is a static group of "good" possible royalty in
any
> one pool of fighters. If that's true, we would have run out long ago,
there
> were only what, 30 people at the first tournament?

No, I think you've misread my point. I did not say there was a static group
of good fighters, I said that by removing fighters after they have won 2
lists you are diminishing the quality of future lists artificially. Of
course people would retire and new ones come up, to suggest otherwise is
silly.

Eirika

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sun, 04 Nov 2001 22:17:12 GMT, ze...@zip.com.au (Zebee Johnstone)
wrote:

We've had some of those, too.

Talan

[Dovie Reynolds]

Lissa McCollum wrote:

> Sometimes it is the small things. My sister and I were unloading our
> gear
> for Estrella and carrying it to our camp. His (then) Royal Majesty
> Alan
> Youngforest saw us, and slipped away from his duties long enough to
> help carry a load for two ladies he didn't know. Nobody looking to
> be impressed, he was just *being* the Dream.
>
> *That* is a King.
>
> Gwendolen Wold

Wow, I wish I'd been you. That would bring my grand total of
times someone has offered to carry stuff for me to 3 (in nearly ten
years of playing).

Gwennydd of Dyfi

[jk]

"Andrew the Purple" <DRE...@techsanctuary.org> wrote:

>
>Now, I'd say we've been particularly lucky in the MidRealm. Many of our
>kings and queens have been good ones.

I suspect that the number of totally horrid ones (in a given kingdom)
can be determined by counting the number of kingdom laws restricting,
or allowing a restriction of, the people who enter the lists.

[DEAJAVU]

Inman, i think is at 6, and that is imressive. though, i think there is one man
who has 11 kings under his belt, and one crown prince. i think, i cant find the
page iht the info right now, but ill check laters! K

[Heather Rose Jones]

Nope. Not a reliable indicator.

Tangwystyl

--
*********
Heather Rose Jones
hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu
*********

[Andrew the Purple]

I don't know how likely it is, but a good king is all things to all people.
He goes to an event that he has absolutely no interest in because his
subjects do.

--
purple
********************************
Visit http://www.drewncapris.net! Go! Go there now!

"Natural gas is hemispheric. I like to call it hemispheric in nature because
it is a product that we can find in our neighborhoods."- George W. Bush
Austin, Texas, Dec. 20, 2000
"Zebee Johnstone" <ze...@zip.com.au> wrote in message
news:slrn9ubfjl...@zipperii.zip.com.au...

[Wilson Heydt]

In article <20011104235000...@mb-ce.aol.com>,

Check the West Kingdom. Look for Jade of Starfall.

--
Hal Ravn Hal Heydt
Mists, Mists, West Albany, CA

"They didn't call him Erik Bloodaxe because he was good with children."
--National Geograhic, May 2000

[Jay Rudin]

"Tanya Guptill (Mira)" <tgup...@teleport.com> asked:

> New question--in your time in the SCA, what are the most positive, moving,
> inspirational deeds that you have seen a Monarch do? Do you have a memory of an event
> that defines "kingly" or the best of what Sovereigns can do in the SCA?

Only one? No. Here are a very few of the many, many times I have
been proud of the Ansteorran Crown.

1. Before becoming Queen, Baroness Joselyn Allyne Reynard disliked
fencers -- a lot. But when she became Queen, and we became her
subjects, she chose to honor us. She said that if the fencers of
Ansteorra swore allegiance to their Queen (which we always do), then
the Queen should show them allegiance as well. She established the
first event in which the fencing tournament was the primary activity,
and named the winner, Don David Gallowglass, to be Queen's Champion.

Not because she liked us, but because she was our Queen.

2. Two reigns later, Queen Sieglinde took us to the next step. She
was the first Queen who honestly loved us. She treated the Ansteorran
fencers with graciousness, loyalty, and love -- and inspired us to be
the best we could be. Many Queens have loved us since, but it was
Queen Sieglinde who first established the warm personal bond between
us and the Ansteorran Queens.

3. The King, for what he thought was good cause, called a man up in
court to chew him out. Perhaps it was necessary, perhaps not. But it
certainly was a strong public disgrace. Twenty minutes later, at the
end of the court, Queen Julia called the same man forward, and said,
"I have faith that you will grow, and do well. In token of that, I
offer you my favor to wear for the rest of the reign."

4. In Larissa's Queen's Championship tourney, I asked her for
permission to do something that would affect the list. *BEFORE* Her
Majesty answered me, she asked the list mistress if it would cause
trouble for her. (The list mistress had no objection, and only then
did Queen Larissa grant my boon.)

5. Candlemas, A.S. XIV (February 1980). The Herald was failing to get
everybody quiet to start Court. King Lloyd picked up the Royal Mace,
stood up, took the herald's staff in his other hand, and stood in
front of the populace, glaring. It took roughly half a minute before
everyone noticed and shut up. Lloyd waited, glaring, until there was
*no* noise in the hall.

"This man is speaking with my voice, and it is your king that you are
choosing to ignore. When you see this (brandishes the herald's
staff),
you think *this* (brandishes the Royal Mace)."

He then handed the *Mace* to the herald for the duration of Court.

6. King Kein had just crowned himself, and was doing some of the
ceremony that was to take place before the Princess rode in to be
crowned. Unfortunately, her horse threw her. Kein ignored the
ceremony and said simply, "I must see to my lady." He then walked out
of his own Coronation to take care of her.

7. Some landed baron (it doesn't matter who) had *really* offended
King Patrick Michael Gordon. The king was fuming at his advisors,
trying to decide how to respond. Somebody suggested that he could
remove the man as baron if he chose to. Still in white hot anger,
King Patrick yelled, "I'm not going to remove him as baron. He's a
good baron!" Not many of us can keep focused on what's right for the
people when we're mad.

(For the record, King Patrick eventually talked to the man, quietly
and privately, and worked things out. But what astounded me then, and
still astounds me, is that IN HIS RAGE he would not consider doing
something that wasn't right.)

But none of these equal the actions of Ansteorra's first Crown
Princess:

8. I had joined the Barony of the Steppes, and was fencing,
performing, and
a few other things, but didn't really understand the SCA yet. I had
talked to the Knight Marshal, Master Lloyd von Eaker, about starting
to
fight heavy, but had never actually made it to a fighter practice.

Then came Steppes Warlord, our big tournament. The morning of the
list,
Master Lloyd came up to me and said, "You've said you wanted to start
fighting. We've got 23 fighters in the list. Would you like to make
it
an even number?"

This was the seventies, and there was no such thing as "authorization"
in Ansteorra. I said yes, and they found me some armor. Squire
William
of Weir gave me two minutes of shield practice, and I was called to
the
tournament field, my first time in armor, having never actually swung
a
sword before, to face... His Royal Highness, Count Jonathan De
Laufyson, the Crown Prince of Ansteorra. There's only one fighter in
Ansteorra who has ever won Crown tourney, and he's done it twice.

He was very polite. He let me throw a bunch of blows, then he threw
one
... to the leg. I got on my knees, he threw away his shield, and then
he killed me.

I walked off the field in pain and sweat, feeling stupid and miserable
and confused -- and worse yet, it was double elimination and I had to
do
it again. A few hot, miserable minutes later, a messenger came over
to
me -- the Crown Princess wished to see me.

I was scared to death. I didn't know the protocol, I didn't know if I
had done something wrong, it was certain that I hadn't done anything
right. And I had just tried (badly) to attack her husband. So I
walked
over to her, scared, confused, and lost.

Her Royal Highness, Princess Willow de Wisp, having seen my miserable
excuse for a fight, told me, "My lord, I saw that you faced my lord in
combat, even without having practiced before. I know that he can only
earn glory because there are those who have the courage to face him,
and
I thank you for that.

"I also saw that when they called the fighters to salute their ladies,
you had no one to salute. Will you do me the honor of carrying this
my
favor for the remainder of the day?" And she handed me a simple
ribbon.
All of her ladies in waiting added their favors as well. I proudly
entered the list in the second round with seven favors on my belt.

That was more than two decades ago, and I've fought in many tourneys
since.
I've had my share of victories, won my share of prizes, and gained my
share of glory.

But I have *never* had a victory to match that defeat.

Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin

[Jay Rudin]

Heather Rose Jones <hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> Someone could win twenty or thirty crown tournaments
> and not have "achieved" anything worth talking about.

As long as we're playing games with the conditions, I should point out
that some of the best reigns achieved nothing worth talking about. By
contrast, the worst reigns *always* produce something to talk about.

[Jay Rudin]

"Anthony J. Bryant" <ajbr...@indiana.edu> wrote:

> I wonder if any king would have the cojones -- and the vision -- to announce
> that the crown tourney to be fought during his reign would not allow those who
> had already sat on the throne.

Well, I'm opposed to the idea. We've had:
good experienced crowns,
bad experienced crowns,
good new crowns, and
bad new crowns.

There's just no clear correlation between the ability to rule well and
the ability to win multiple tourneys. It follows that such a rule is
neither more nor less reasonable than a rule banning redheads, or
calligraphers, or heralds, or Saxons, or any other arbitrary
restriction.

[Anthony J. Bryant]

Jay Rudin wrote:

Of course not, but it's like the Hugos, especially in areas like the arts, where
you sometimes see an artist who's already one three or four Hugos purposely taking
his name OUT of contention so someone else can have a chance to win.

There are always other tourneys, other wars. Once you've proven you're hot by
winning -- oh, three or five times, what's the point other than to keep showing off
the size of your testicular testosterone muscle producing power?

I really feel that once you've ruled -- say -- seven times, you should be BANNED
from crown again unless you have a good reason like making your wife a duchess or
something.

Effingham

[Gilmore, Phyllis]

I hesitate to name the king, for fear of gross error, but it is
sometimes the simplest acts that have the greatest effect. I had
attended no more than a handful of events over a span of several years,
for a variety of reasons, and it had been at least a year since the
previous occasion.

On this had, I had come to an event alone, at a treeless venue in Caid
on a hot summer day and was struggling to set up some shade for myself.
A gentleman, whom I did not yet know, frowned in my direction, clearly
disturbed over my struggles--and I suddenly found myself surrounded by
by a group of gentles who swiftly set up the recalitrant bit of poles
and cloth, and for whom a smile and a thank-you were all the reward
necessary.

Only later, at opening court, did I realize that it was our king who had
seen to it that a lady in distress got help.

By the by, this discussion got me thinking: Occasionally, luck or a
very good day must surely mean that the winner of the lists is a
surprise. It would be interesting to hear tales of occasions when such
wins led to particularly notable reigns.

Phyllis

[Fernando Vigil]

>I don't know how likely it is, but a good king is all things to all people.

Unfortunately this is impossible. Why? Because different people want things
that are mutually exclusive.

>He goes to an event that he has absolutely no interest in because his
>subjects do.

this I agree with.

Fenando

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Conde Fernando Rodriguez de Falcon, KSCA, Baron, OP
Kingdom of Calontir, Barony of Three Rivers
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[Fernando Vigil]

Effingham wrote:

>There are always other tourneys, other wars. Once you've proven you're hot by
>winning -- oh, three or five times, what's the point other than to keep
>showing off
>the size of your testicular testosterone muscle producing power?

By saying this you imply that the only reason to fight Crown is to "show off
the size of your testicular testosterone muscle producing power." Sigh.

I'd love to be King again for a lot of reasonsnon of which includes that which
you imply.

I loved:

Being able to use my skills to give my wife something she could not gain on her
own, and that I could not have done without her.

Seeing the look on the faces of people we was able to give awards to, and
seeing the smiles and the tears.

Looking behind us at wars and seeing an army marching to the field that
stretched as far as my eye could see.

The extra sense of pride I got as King out of every cool thing done by the
people of our Kingdom.

The chance to recognize people for works they did in the spercial ways our
kingdom and society had created.

And so many other things which made it so special.

In comparison, your suggested "reason" is so tiny it makes me laugh.

Fernando

[Anthony J. Bryant]

Fernando Vigil wrote:

> Effingham wrote:
>
> >There are always other tourneys, other wars. Once you've proven you're hot by
> >winning -- oh, three or five times, what's the point other than to keep
> >showing off
> >the size of your testicular testosterone muscle producing power?
>
> By saying this you imply that the only reason to fight Crown is to "show off
> the size of your testicular testosterone muscle producing power." Sigh.
>

Well, of course I was being facetious. There are actually several dukes I count as
friends, but I personally would like to see a crown list or two where the
guaranteed spoilers sat out for a while to give someone *else* a chance to rule,
to give someone *else* a chance to give their significant others something they
couldn't get on their own, to give someone *else* a chance to have the pleasure of
rewarding the worthy, to give someone *else* a chance to lead an army.

Surely being selfish isn't one of the chivalric virtues. <wink>

Effingham

[Elsa Saxisdatter]

> I should probably admit that in general I question the sanity and good
> taste of anyone who seeks a third reign, unless perhaps it's to make a
> duchess (or duke) of a permanent partner who wasn't his or her first
> consort.
>
> Talan

I most respectfully submit the opinion that both His Grace Duke Jade
and His Grace Duke Fabian (another 3+ winner) have always seemed both
sane and gracious gentlemen whose good taste and manners I would not
question.

In Service
Lady Elsa Saxisdatter

[xaviar]

>I don't know how likely it is, but a good king is all things to all people.
>He goes to an event that he has absolutely no interest in because his
>subjects do.

>From: "Andrew the Purple"

I think that a good King would just love going to events, thus would have
interest in all events, reguardless of theme.
In this I have known quite a few in the East and Several from the Middle,
Outlands, West, Dracenwald, etc...
Xaviar

[Fernando Vigil]

>Well, of course I was being facetious.

Sorry if I missed that. You touched on something important enough to me (the
reasons for fighting Crown) that I perhaps failed to give it the benefit of
the doubt.

[Brian M. Scott]

On 05 Nov 2001 19:40:06 GMT, fvi...@aol.comNoSpam (Fernando Vigil)
wrote:

>Effingham wrote:
>
>>There are always other tourneys, other wars. Once you've proven you're hot by
>>winning -- oh, three or five times, what's the point other than to keep
>>showing off
>>the size of your testicular testosterone muscle producing power?
>
>By saying this you imply that the only reason to fight Crown is to "show off
>the size of your testicular testosterone muscle producing power." Sigh.
>
>I'd love to be King again for a lot of reasonsnon of which includes that which
>you imply.
>
>I loved:
>
>Being able to use my skills to give my wife something she could not gain on her
>own, and that I could not have done without her.
>
>Seeing the look on the faces of people we was able to give awards to, and
>seeing the smiles and the tears.
>
>Looking behind us at wars and seeing an army marching to the field that
>stretched as far as my eye could see.
>
>The extra sense of pride I got as King out of every cool thing done by the
>people of our Kingdom.
>
>The chance to recognize people for works they did in the spercial ways our
>kingdom and society had created.
>
>And so many other things which made it so special.
>
>In comparison, your suggested "reason" is so tiny it makes me laugh.

But all of these are to some degree selfish and none of them in my
view justifies hogging the position. Twice is plenty.

Talan

[Wilson Heydt]

In article <3BE6DC52...@indiana.edu>,

Many Dukes *do* refrain from fighting, unless they have a reason
they consider good. Among them may be special events (Lochac is
goingt obecome its own kingdom next year...who wouldn't like to be
the King who crowns the first King of Lochac?), a perceived need for
new or different laws, friction between Baord and kingdoms, and so
on.

Who are you or I to set some arbitrary limit or sit in judgement
over what is or is not a good reason for a given person to strive
for the Crown again?

[Gene Wirchenko]

"Anthony J. Bryant" <ajbr...@indiana.edu> wrote:

>Jay Rudin wrote:
>
>> "Anthony J. Bryant" <ajbr...@indiana.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > I wonder if any king would have the cojones -- and the vision -- to announce
>> > that the crown tourney to be fought during his reign would not allow those who
>> > had already sat on the throne.
>>
>> Well, I'm opposed to the idea. We've had:
>> good experienced crowns,
>> bad experienced crowns,
>> good new crowns, and
>> bad new crowns.
>>
>> There's just no clear correlation between the ability to rule well and
>> the ability to win multiple tourneys. It follows that such a rule is
>> neither more nor less reasonable than a rule banning redheads, or
>> calligraphers, or heralds, or Saxons, or any other arbitrary
>> restriction.
>>
>
>Of course not, but it's like the Hugos, especially in areas like the arts, where
>you sometimes see an artist who's already one three or four Hugos purposely taking
>his name OUT of contention so someone else can have a chance to win.

Whose choice is it? The author's. That makes all the
difference.

>There are always other tourneys, other wars. Once you've proven you're hot by
>winning -- oh, three or five times, what's the point other than to keep showing off
>the size of your testicular testosterone muscle producing power?

Some people consider high rank an opportunity to make a bigger
difference.

>I really feel that once you've ruled -- say -- seven times, you should be BANNED
>from crown again unless you have a good reason like making your wife a duchess or
>something.

Going for status is a good reason, but having served before
isn't?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Mon, 5 Nov 2001 23:42:42 GMT, whh...@kithrup.com (Wilson Heydt)
wrote:

[...]

>Many Dukes *do* refrain from fighting, unless they have a reason
>they consider good. Among them may be special events (Lochac is
>goingt obecome its own kingdom next year...who wouldn't like to be
>the King who crowns the first King of Lochac?), a perceived need for
>new or different laws, friction between Baord and kingdoms, and so
>on.

By and large my attitude is 'save us from royalty with agendas'. I
don't see any of those as good reasons.

>Who are you or I to set some arbitrary limit or sit in judgement
>over what is or is not a good reason for a given person to strive
>for the Crown again?

If not people like us, then who?

Talan

[Ted Eisenstein]

> I loved:
>
> Being able to use my skills to give my wife something she could not gain on
> her
> own, and that I could not have done without her.
>
> Seeing the look on the faces of people we was able to give awards to, and
> seeing the smiles and the tears.
>
> Looking behind us at wars and seeing an army marching to the field that
> stretched as far as my eye could see.
>
> The extra sense of pride I got as King out of every cool thing done by the
> people of our Kingdom.
>
> The chance to recognize people for works they did in the spercial ways our
> kingdom and society had created.
>
> And so many other things which made it so special.

But aren't most of those true for all members of a kingdom? (Errr, those
that _have_ a spouse, for #1, of course.) Recognizing people for their
achievements
can certainly be done by way of saying "Thank you" or "Wow, that's the
best Dubis I've ever seen!"; pride of kingdom can be had by all members
of the kingdom; armies marching as one certainly thrill all its members.
As a court herald, I've certainly been thrilled to be a part of the process
of handing out awards (and I still remember one or two AoA's I announced,
14 or so years ago. . . ). As for your lovely wife, well, there you have me.

But still - a lot of what you mention as being a perk of being king, can
be said to be a perk of all who participate in the SCA. Is there any thing
which thrilled you as a king that could not have happened when you were
off the throne?

Alban

[Zebee Johnstone]

In rec.org.sca on Tue, 06 Nov 2001 04:18:47 GMT

Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 5 Nov 2001 23:42:42 GMT, whh...@kithrup.com (Wilson Heydt)
>wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>Many Dukes *do* refrain from fighting, unless they have a reason
>>they consider good. Among them may be special events (Lochac is
>>goingt obecome its own kingdom next year...who wouldn't like to be
>>the King who crowns the first King of Lochac?), a perceived need for
>>new or different laws, friction between Baord and kingdoms, and so
>>on.
>
>By and large my attitude is 'save us from royalty with agendas'. I
>don't see any of those as good reasons.
>

Whereas I can't see that "wanna seeif I can" to be a good reason
either.

I can't see anything wrong with someone who strives to be involved in
a special event. I have seen both sides of the "rules" motive, and
that's tricky.

A while ago there was a kerfuffle in the West when a king decided to
do soemthing that pissed Lochac off so much we were about to secede
with extreme prejudice.

The next West Crown list had at least one old used Duke who entered
specifically to do what he could to heal the rift. He wouldn't have
entered otherwise.

And another king was believed to have said "Well, you can hate this as
much as you like, I'll just enact it when I'm king and if you remove
it, I'll just redo it again."

But from a recreationist POV, I think there is something good in
people wanting to be king for a reason. It brings us closer to the
uncertainty of our ancestors dealing with power struggles.

I think one of the advantages of the SCA is that we do play some with
power and personalities, it gives us some feel for the times we
re-create, in a way that a democratic style wouldn't.

Silfren

[Todd Rich]

Wilson Heydt <whh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
(snip)

> Many Dukes *do* refrain from fighting, unless they have a reason
> they consider good. Among them may be special events (Lochac is

(snorp)

> --
> Hal Ravn Hal Heydt
> Mists, Mists, West Albany, CA

Hal, could you or Dorthea tell the story of the creation of 'Ducal
Prerogative'?
Torin

[Rev. Mike Martin]

Jay Rudin wrote:
>
<SNIP>

> There's just no clear correlation between the ability to rule well and
> the ability to win multiple tourneys. It follows that such a rule is
> neither more nor less reasonable than a rule banning redheads, or
> calligraphers, or heralds, or Saxons, or any other arbitrary
> restriction.

Never the less, it could be done. (I agree that it would be a bad
idea...) ;)

The Crown can refuse to allow ANYONE to fight in their tourney, for ANY
reason.

Hrothgar
--
Rev. Mike Martin Lord Hrothgar the Smith
http://members.home.net/mmartin139/
Visne crisere? Iam non aeger sum

[Jay Rudin]

"Anthony J. Bryant" <ajbr...@indiana.edu> wrote:

> Of course not, but it's like the Hugos, especially in areas like
> the arts, where you sometimes see an artist who's already one
> three or four Hugos purposely taking his name OUT of contention
> so someone else can have a chance to win.

...

> I really feel that once you've ruled -- say -- seven times, you
> should be BANNED from crown again unless you have a good reason
> like making your wife a duchess or something.

There is all the difference in the world between choosing to take your
own name out of contention (which many dukes do) and being banned from
entering.

One is an act of courtesy and honor on your part; the other is
something forced on you against your will. No resemblance.

If you change your stand to "It would be courteous for people who have
won several times to take a break," then I would have no real quarrel
with your position.

(Mind you, I would still disagree. I actively want anyone who chooses
to enter a tourney to be allowed to do it. My goal is to win by
defeating my opponents, not to be given the prize because the real
contenders were kept out.)

[Arval]

Robin Gilwell wrote:

> There's just no clear correlation between the ability to rule well and
> the ability to win multiple tourneys. It follows that such a rule is
> neither more nor less reasonable than a rule banning redheads, or
> calligraphers, or heralds, or Saxons, or any other arbitrary
> restriction.

It follows only if one considers only the goal of improving the quality of
rulers. If one's goal is to allow more people to share the fun of being
royalty -- a perfectly reasonable goal for our game -- then a restriction
on the number of times one may sit the throne is the logical solution. And
it's one I would support in my own kingdom.

Arval

[Elsa Saxisdatter]

> Well, of course I was being facetious. There are actually several dukes I count as
> friends, but I personally would like to see a crown list or two where the
> guaranteed spoilers sat out for a while to give someone *else* a chance to rule,
> to give someone *else* a chance to give their significant others something they
> couldn't get on their own, to give someone *else* a chance to have the pleasure of
> rewarding the worthy, to give someone *else* a chance to lead an army.
>
> Surely being selfish isn't one of the chivalric virtues. <wink>
>
> Effingham

Just another way of looking at it...
I'm currently prepping ym armor to start fighting. Should I ever
become skilled enough on the field to be a contender for a coronet or
a crown, I want to know that I got there by my own work and skill, not
because their Graces Uther, Fabian, Jade, Garrick, et al. decided not
to play so that I could "have a turn." If I can't win in a list made
of everyone who wants that crown then I don't deserve or want it. One
of the things I look forward to, as an incipient fighter in the West,
is taking on some of those "guaranteed spoilers" in combat. I want to
be able to judge my skill against the very best, several of whom I am
fortunate enough to live near.
I wouldn't feel any of those guys was "selfish" to defeat me, rather,
I'd be disappointed if none of them showed up to make that bid for the
throne a serious challenge. It would feel like something was missing.

Lady Elsa Saxisdatter (who asks indulgence, she's still having fun
with the week old "Lady") :)

[Wilson Heydt]

In article <9s8atq$r25$1...@news.panix.com>, Todd Rich <to...@panix.com> wrote:
>Wilson Heydt <whh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>(snip)
>> Many Dukes *do* refrain from fighting, unless they have a reason
>> they consider good. Among them may be special events (Lochac is
>(snorp)
>

>Hal, could you or Dorthea tell the story of the creation of 'Ducal
>Prerogative'?

It'll have to be Dorothea. I wasn't there. Alternatively, it
should be in the History, and that's on line.

--
Hal Ravn Hal Heydt
Mists, Mists, West Albany, CA

"They didn't call him Erik Bloodaxe because he was good with children."
--National Geograhic, May 2000

[Wilson Heydt]

In article <3be7634d....@enews.newsguy.com>,

Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:

Since we already disagree on what constitutes a "good reason", how
are we likely to be able to agree on how to limit such efforts?

[Brian M. Scott]

On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 16:04:26 GMT, whh...@kithrup.com (Wilson Heydt)
wrote:

>In article <3be7634d....@enews.newsguy.com>,
>Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>>On Mon, 5 Nov 2001 23:42:42 GMT, whh...@kithrup.com (Wilson Heydt)
>>wrote:

>>[...]

>>>Many Dukes *do* refrain from fighting, unless they have a reason
>>>they consider good. Among them may be special events (Lochac is
>>>goingt obecome its own kingdom next year...who wouldn't like to be
>>>the King who crowns the first King of Lochac?), a perceived need for
>>>new or different laws, friction between Baord and kingdoms, and so
>>>on.

>>By and large my attitude is 'save us from royalty with agendas'. I
>>don't see any of those as good reasons.

>>>Who are you or I to set some arbitrary limit or sit in judgement
>>>over what is or is not a good reason for a given person to strive
>>>for the Crown again?

>>If not people like us, then who?

>Since we already disagree on what constitutes a "good reason", how
>are we likely to be able to agree on how to limit such efforts?

Not quite what I meant. You seemed to be casting doubt on the
propriety of making such judgements at all; I *expect* someone who has
been heavily involved to have opinions on the matter, and among them,
I'm most interested in the opinions of those who are not part of the
court circle.

Talan

[Tanya Guptill (Mira Silverlock)]

Noble friends,

Someone at Pennsic was talking about an old custom (which they hadn't seen for
some time) in their Kingdom, where Dukes could enter Crown Tourney just as
'spoilers' to try to remove unwanted fighters, and then could bow out of the
tourney in later rounds. Does anyone know which kingdom did this?

Mira Silverlock
An Tir

[Bronwynmgn]

In article <3BE5A908...@qwest.net>, Lissa McCollum <lis...@qwest.net>
writes:

>> New question--in your time in the SCA, what are the most positive, moving,
>> inspirational deeds that you have seen a Monarch do? Do you have a memory
>of an event
>> that defines "kingly" or the best of what Sovereigns can do in the SCA?

Some years ago, when Viscount Rurik was Prince of Aethelmearc, he pulled off
the road to the parking lot at Pennsic to dig postholes to set up our clan
gate. He had noticed my clan lord, who is a disabled Vietnam vet, doing it
himself. Despite the protests of "But, your Highness, you shouldn't be doing
that", he simply said, "I've done this for a living" and took care of it,
helped set up the gate, and then went back to taking his own car to the parking
lot. I should note that the man he helped was NOT a subject of Aethelmearc.
Actually I've heard a number of other similar Rurik stories, involving such
things as continually alternating, for hours on end, between shovelling snow
and mopping the floor at an event which got hit with a surprise blizzard.

And Duke Timothy of Arindale, when on the throne, would routinely come into the
kitchen with his squires after feast to scrub the pots. On at least one
occasion, when he had some business to deal with, he ordered the kitchen staff
to leave him dishes to do.

Not glamorous, maybe, but these are people who have not forgotten how to be
chivalrous and humble.

Brangwayna Morgan

[Nils K Hammer]

"dukes as spoilers" explicitly violates the rule that all
contenders for crown do so with an intent to serve.
Maybe this rule I am remembering was east kingdom only,
but even if other kingdoms permit it, it looks dishonest.

Nils

[Ashland Henderson]

"Tanya Guptill (Mira Silverlock)" <tgup...@teleport.com> wrote in message news:<3BE833B4...@teleport.com>...

The old theory of the ducal perogative was that a duke could enter a
tournament and then drop out whenever he/she wished. IMHO this was an
interpetation of a much earlier concept that a duke could come to a
tournament and not be required to fight. The way in which it got
translated is obscure, at best.

This was all in the West Kingdom AFAIK. The theory has surfaced as
recently as a year or two ago and was once again dropped for a variety
of reasons, mainly the very strong opposition of any number of folks
including a number of dukes.

The theory as stated was never to allow dukes to be spoilers, and
given the way the West runs its lists it would have been pretty
difficult to arrange.

[Kirk Poore]

Arval wrote:

> ... If one's goal is to allow more people to share the fun of being

> royalty -- a perfectly reasonable goal for our game -- then a restriction
> on the number of times one may sit the throne is the logical solution. And
> it's one I would support in my own kingdom.
>
> Arval

I think this is the reason I prefer that multi-dukes sit out, though making a
comeback every 4 or 5 years is fine with me. And when two or three guys suck
up all the reigns in a kingdom for years on end, it seems pretty selfish to me.

Kirk FitzDavid

[Heather Rose Jones]

That is not a universally shared opinion of the individuals in question.

Tangwystyl

--
*********
Heather Rose Jones
hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu
*********

[Dennis O'Connor]

"Tanya Guptill (Mira Silverlock)" <tgup...@teleport.com> wrote ...

> Someone at Pennsic was talking about an old custom (which they hadn't seen for
> some time) in their Kingdom, where Dukes could enter Crown Tourney just as
> 'spoilers' to try to remove unwanted fighters, and then could bow out of the
> tourney in later rounds. Does anyone know which kingdom did this?

Which Kingdom could prevent it, lacking telepaths ?

Frankly, I encourage Dukes and Duchesses, and to a lesser
extent Counts and Countesses, to "get out there and vote".
I see it as a duty they owe to their Kingdom, to ensure the
quality of the Crowns that come after them. Who better than
Royal Peers to know what qualities are required of the Crown ?

The risk, however, is that they might win, and honor requires
they be willing to serve should that fate befall them. Only
someone devoted to the SCA would risk that burden, but
only someone devoted to the SCA would reign twice !

There's all kinds of plusses and minus to this, of course,
but taken all in all, I think Royal Peers and only
Royal Peers should "vote".
--
Dennis O'Connor dm...@primenet.com
We don't become a rabid dog to destroy a rabid dog.

[Dennis O'Connor]

"Kirk Poore" <xxxremovex...@home.com> wrote in ...

> I think this is the reason I prefer that multi-dukes sit out, though making a
> comeback every 4 or 5 years is fine with me. And when two or three guys suck
> up all the reigns in a kingdom for years on end, it seems pretty selfish to me.

Tell me, if two or three guys cleaned all the latrines in the kingdom
for years on end, would you consider that selfish ?

Being Crown is expensive, time consuming and can be emotionally draining.
It has ruined friendships, it has ruined marriages.

Sure, it's got it's bright shining moments.

But it's naive to think that a Duke or Duchess would reign again out
of "selfishness". Other things must motivate them.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Tue, 6 Nov 2001 22:30:13 -0700, "Dennis O'Connor"
<dm...@primenet.com> wrote:

>"Kirk Poore" <xxxremovex...@home.com> wrote in ...
>> I think this is the reason I prefer that multi-dukes sit out, though making a
>> comeback every 4 or 5 years is fine with me. And when two or three guys suck
>> up all the reigns in a kingdom for years on end, it seems pretty selfish to me.

>Tell me, if two or three guys cleaned all the latrines in the kingdom
>for years on end, would you consider that selfish ?

Not really parallel: the rewards aren't comparable (for the vast
majority, at any rate).

>Being Crown is expensive, time consuming and can be emotionally draining.
>It has ruined friendships, it has ruined marriages.

>Sure, it's got it's bright shining moments.

>But it's naive to think that a Duke or Duchess would reign again out
>of "selfishness". Other things must motivate them.

Addiction? (That's only partly facetious.)

Talan

[Ted Eisenstein]

> Frankly, I encourage Dukes and Duchesses, and to a lesser
> extent Counts and Countesses, to "get out there and vote".
> I see it as a duty they owe to their Kingdom, to ensure the
> quality of the Crowns that come after them. Who better than
> Royal Peers to know what qualities are required of the Crown ?

People who've been retainers more than once? Any of the populace
who've been around a while? Experienced Great Officers?

Alban

[Elsa Saxisdatter]

> >
> > I most respectfully submit the opinion that both His Grace Duke Jade
> > and His Grace Duke Fabian (another 3+ winner) have always seemed both
> > sane and gracious gentlemen whose good taste and manners I would not
> > question.
> >
> > In Service
> > Lady Elsa Saxisdatter
>
> That is not a universally shared opinion of the individuals in question.
>
> Tangwystyl

All people are entitled to their opinions. However, both men have
dealt fairly and graciously with me as a "nobody" and as such have
earned my defense, much in the same way you would find me denying
insults made about yourself. Really, perhaps the point to look at is,
are there any three+ time winners who you know to be possessed of both
sanity and good taste? Surely there must be one or two? I think that
the blanket statement to which I responded was untrue and
discourteous.

Elsa