group size, status, was Principalities

["David H Ritterskamp" <dhritter@dpcmail.dukepower.com>]

Poster: "David H Ritterskamp" <dhritter@dpcmail.dukepower.com>

     
     
     On Tue, 8 Apr 97, "Terry L. Neill" <Neilltl@ptsc.slg.eds.com> wrote:
     staying a shire or canton, even if the group is big enough to 
     >be a barony, is quite an acceptable alternative to me.  It should be 
     up 
     >to the group.  If they want to be a barony, fine.  If not, fine.  
     Unless 
     >I live there at the time, it's nothing to me.  Neither form of group 
     has 
     >an advantage or disadvantage over the other.
     >
     >
     >        - Anarra
     >
     >
     On this point, I have to disagree; one of the biggest reasons why 
     Crannog Mor (years ago)
     looked at becoming a barony was because they felt that as a shire, 
     they didn't really have
     A) much in the way of respect for their autonomy (go figure!) or B) 
     much recognition for anything they did.
     
     (A) They felt that as a shire, they could be ignored by nearby groups 
     (which happened at least
     a couple of times, & they didn't like it) and as a barony, this likely 
     wouldn't happen as much.
     One big nasty instance of this was a Giant's Dance that was held 
     *within* their "jurisdiction" without
     so much as a by-your-leave, invitation to co-host, or any of the 
     profits.  They felt that had they had
     a Baron/ess, this likely wouldn't have happened.
     
     (B) Since a shire's only representation to kingdom is their seneschal 
     & a barony has a baron/ess which 
     answers directly to the throne, a shire couldn't really give the 
     recognition & awards to its populace that
     the local group thought they deserved.  They could write in for 
     kingdom awards, but really, what's the
     ratio of kingdom awards to baronial awards?  Nobody ever heard of a 
     shire award & yet shires are legally
     only slightly smaller than baronies.  I think a shire had to have 20? 
     10? something like that, whereas a barony
     has to have 25.
     
     I'm not going to get into who done what, but the above is (IMO) a 
     fairly good example for baronial vs. shire 
     status.  A shire that expects to be around should go ahead and move 
     towards baronial status; there's no reason
     not to (except for the politics that this move would engender) and 
     many reasons to do so.
     
     Ld. Jonathan Blackbow
     House O'Shannon

=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org