Re: Selecting Crowns

[edh@ascc01.ascc.att.com (Ed Hopkins)]

On Apr 2, 5:50pm, Leifr Johansson <lharrop@mrj.com> wrote:

> Gentles all, who think:
>
> > that ... choosing royalty by stick-jocking is not
> > period choosing them by combat is.
>
> > This alluding to conquest in the like of William of Normandy's little
> > affair in Hastings, 1066.
>
> Actually, William the Bastard was Edward the Confessor's CHOSEN heir.
> Harold Godwinson actually acknowledged this and swore fealty to William
> as the heir to the Crown of England.  After Edward died, the nobility of
> England turned around and VOTED Harold GWS to be King.  Harald Hardaridan
> (sp), King of Norway, had his own claim to push as legitimate heir to
> Swen and Cunate.  So in 1066 there were three different claims to the
> throne, one by election by the nobility, one by "illegitamate" descent
> from the last king (though I'm not clear on how that worked) and one by
> legitimate desent from an earlier dynasty.
>
> But they didn't just throw the Throne open to all takers.  You had to
> have some sort of legitimate claim.  The three claiments were viable (and
> all reasonably good choices, too).

The next day, Apr 3, 5:49pm, he wrote:

> In the end, the legitimacy of our Kings rests not on the fact they won a
> Crown Tourney, but on the fact that the populace decides to acknowledge
> them Kings.  In fact, I would prefer it if we said "Prince by Right of
> Arms", and "Acknowledged King of Atlantia".
>
> This is, after all, a volunteer organization.  It falls apart when you
> try to apply force to achieve your goals.

These two missives have given me an idea.  Please pardon me if
it has already been propsed.

I propose two or three Crown Tourneys in a short space of time,
each producing a Prince by Right of Arms, and then, after six months,
one of them is chosen to be the next king, perhaps by the current King,
or by Curia, or by the populace, or perhaps by a melee or Arts & Sciences
competition, or one of the other methods previosly suggested to replace
rather than supplement the tourney selection.

I see two advantages to this proposal:

1. It is a compromise between the current system and one of the proposed
   alternatives.

2. As far as I know, it does not require a change in Corpora.
   Corpora currently states that a new King must be raised to that
   state from that of a Prince chosen by Tourney, but I don't
   beleive it mentions that this elevation must be automatic, or
   that only one Tourney may be held per term.

If I am in error, I welcome correction.

-- Alfredo el Bufon
edh@ascc01.ascc.att.com