[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

Forward from Earl Dafydd

Poster: Kevin of Thornbury <kevin@maxson.com>

554 atlantia@csc.ncsu.edu... Remote protocol error

   ----- Original message follows -----

  [ Part 2.2: "Included Message" ]

Date: Tue, 9 Dec 1997 15:52:06 -0500 (EST)
From: David KUIJT <kuijt@umiacs.umd.edu>
To: Logan & Arielle <sirlogan@mail.clt.bellsouth.net>
Cc: atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
Subject: Re: Principality

On Tue, 9 Dec 1997, Logan & Arielle wrote:

> Ok I have a question regarding this split, as that is what it actually
> is.

Your Majesty,

You say this is a split.  Why do you see the creation of a Principality
a split? Is the creation of a Barony a split?  I am not trying to make
light of your concerns, but I would like to bring them into the open --
suspect you are just speaking the concerns that many others have, but do
not voice. 

(In the discussion below I will speak of the Principality as if it will
exist, but this is just for the sake of debate -- note that it is by no
means certain that it will happen, and it will only happen if it has the
support of the populace. ) 

If a Principality eventually went Kingdom, that would be a split, true. 
But note that we are talking about a situation five, eight, or even ten
years down the road.  Has it injured the East Kingdom for Aethelmark to
Kingdom?  No, actually, it has helped it.  And Aethelmark was about ten
years a Principality before going Kingdom.  Will it hurt the Middle for
Northshield to go Kingdom?  I believe that it will help the Middle.  Can
you find a single example of a Principality going Kingdom that hurt the
Kingdom it left?  Perhaps, but I certainly can't think of one.

And why should it be assumed as a certainty that this Principality would
go Kingdom?  The Principality of the Mists is older than the Kingdom of
Atlantia, I believe -- 20 years or more.  And it never has, and likely
never will, become a Kingdom.  The Principality of the Mists shares a
of similarity with the region under discussion, both in geography and

To treat your subsequent questions but briefly, as they are broad enough
to have many answers:

> Why?  What will it accomplish?  What good is it?  Who or what will
> it aid?

"Why?"  Why not?  What is wrong with the idea of a Principality?  If
having a King and Queen is fun, why should not the same be true of a
Prince and Princess? 

"What will it accomplish? " As much, and as little, as the good
and hard work and enthusiasm that people put into it.  A focal point for
the region, more than anything else, I suspect.  Just as a Barony allows
for spiffitude that a collection of Shires might not have, I would hope
that the union is greater than the sum of its parts. 

"What good is it?"  That is a hard one.  What good is a Kingdom?  What
good is a Barony?  I believe that they are both good things, but I
easily answer those questions either.  And I think that a Principality
something between those two, and it seems reasonable that it would share
in the goodness of both, while not being the same as either.  Something
bigger and more glorious than a barony, but less glorious than a

"Who or what will it aid?"  Just speaking for myself, I hope that it
become a focus for energy, spiffitude, and the like in the region

I also hope it will not impact the rest of the kingdom negatively.

And although you do not say it in so many words, I suspect that you have
the same concern -- you are worried that the formation of a Principality
in the north will have a negative impact on the rest of the Kingdom.


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