Source of Legitmacy

[Steve Muhlberger <STEVEM@einstein.unipissing.ca>]

Liefr Johansson talks about several forms of Royal Legitimacy and contrasts 
this:

>The Legitimacy of the BoD.  That is, the authority of the Crown is 
>legitimate because the Corporation lays down the rules for chosing the 
>Crown, and the Corporation OWNS the game.  

With this:

>The last possiblity is the legitimacy of Acknowledgement:  The authority 
>of the Crown is dependent on the Acknowledgement of the Populace that the 
>couple is, no matter how they are selected, the best people to fulfill 
>the duties of the Crown.  

And therefore concludes this:

>This premise means, however, that changes in selecting the Crown are 
>something which can, and should, be made at the Kingdom level by the 
>populace, and should focus on a selection system which will obtain us 
>candidates most able to fulfill the most important duties of the Crown.

I don't think the contrasts drawn here are pure.  One would be a fool to say 
that "legitimacy of Acknowledgement" is not a very important part of Royal 
Legitimacy.  However, I think that "legitimacy of a given set of monarchs in 
the SCA" also exists.  

When Acre broke off from the East Kingdom (which then included Atlantia if I 
recall correctly), the King of Acre-to-be had legitimacy of acknowledgement 
for those who left with him, but not for those whom he left behind.  However, 
he most certainly lacked legitimacy in the eyes of every other kingdom of the 
SCA.  This may have had something to do with actions or rulings of the Board, 
but more important was the fact that no other monarchs in the SCA recognized 
Acre as being either "the real East Kingdom" or as "part of the SCA."  And if 
reports I heard are accurate, Acre quickly began to diverge from the SCA in 
the way they played.

So though I agree that legitimacy is most immediately decided within a 
kingdom, people outside the kingdom have a role, too.  In the past the Board, 
the Steward or the Society Seneschal have made rulings on the legitimacy of 
various potential monarchs; but they don't have the only voice.

I disagree with Liefr that this "generalized Society interest" in the 
legitimacy of monarchs or the selection method for monarchs is rightfully 
called "Legitimacy of the BoD or of the SCA, Inc."  I think the tradition of 
selecting our monarchs in a given way is a foundation of the SCA, and this 
tradition could exist in a Society quite differently organized than the one 
we have now; in other words in a Society where the SCA, Inc. did not "own the 
game" or try to act like it did.

Finnvarr

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe to the Kingdom of Atlantia mailing list, send a message
to majordomo@csc.ncsu.edu with no subject and the body consisting of:
unsubscribe atlantia