Re: Response to Proposed IAC Banishment Change

[Lance Harrop <lharrop@mrj.com>]

Lady Esclarmonde replies to Lord Fhearghuis Ghillechriost mac mheic Iain
> > 

>   I must disagree with you that there is nothing wrong with chosing a 
> monarch by combat. It is wholly anachronistic and one of the major 
> problems citied (along with the policy on religion) when the SCA tries to 
> be recognized as an "educational" organization. Personally, I would 
> perfer that if a leader is chosen by arms we use the titles and forms of 
> the tournament societies in 15C some of which did chose leaders that way.

I don't know if chosing our Royalty by tournement is anachronistic, after 
all, nobody has ever used that system, so obviously we can not be taking that
system out of its time and place to use.  (Counter examples will now 
doubtlessly spring forward ;-).

>   As for democracy, it is certainly period for say the Northern Italian 
> city-states. And was not the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire elected?

The Holy Roman Emperor was chosen by a limited number of electors, all of 
whom inheirited their right to be electors (or won that right in wars).
Hardly truely democratic.  Republics, however, with fairly broad 
sufferages (though never woman sufferage, that I've heard of) did exist 
in period.  Also kings might be elected from candidates within the royal 
family, as often happened in Anglo-Saxon England.

>   The question is how tightly we wish to cleave to our "educational" 
> purpose. The purpose which justifies our tax exemption under American law.

I have a hard time imagining that our system of chosing royality really
effects our tax exemption status.

>   As to money benefits for the crown, that too is a matter which is 
> governed by tax law--doing it improperly will raise problems under the 
> "private inurement" prohibitions in the Internal Revenue Code. That could 
> imperil the tax exemption of the SCA as a whole.

This, however, is very true, and a concern for all the kingdom, as we are 
pumping about $7000 of kingdom funds directly into the hands of the 
Crowns a year (when we actually have the money, that is).

The method of chosing our Crowns, and the authority and "reimbursement" 
of those individuals really have nothing to do with each other, excepting 
that Crown Tourneys seem to draw and reward individuals who seem to have 
no respect for the opinions or asperations of people who play this game 
for reasons other then getting bashed on a tourney field.

Maybe it is simply time for us to look closely at our relationship to our 
Crown?

In Service
Leifr Johansson