HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: doconnor@sedona.intel.com (Dennis O'Connor)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: armor, physics, and aluminum
Date: 24 Dec 92 11:44:58
Organization: Intel i960(tm) Architecture
NNTP-Posting-Host: potato.intel.com
In-reply-to: robertdf@microsoft.com's message of 23 Dec 92 22:43:00 GMT


robertdf@microsoft.com (Robert Del Favero) writes:
] 2. You seem to be arguing that the prevalent armor technology of the middle 
] ages was unable to protect its users from the abuse of a rattan sword, 
] which we use because it is so much less lethal than the real thing. One 
] could conclude that medieval armor was therefore unable to protect its 
] users from the more lethal abuse of a steel sword or halberd, and therefore 
] the armored fighters of our period wasted their time and money buying and 
] wearing armor. What have I missed?

Real medieval armor was primarily intended to protect you from
being killed or seriously maimed. My SCA armor is intended to
protect me from that, AND to protect me against bruises, cuts,
abrasions, broken bones and, generally, pain. Given that the mass
of SCA weapons is the near that of medieval ones, it follows
that I need better armor than a real medieval fighter would.

Also : I don't have to march 20 miles in a day in my armor, whereas
real soldiers did. Additionally, running away was a common life-saving 
tactic in warfare. So if I were a real medieval soldier, I might want
the lightest armour I could get that, even it if meant I got bruised 
more and felt more pain.

Lastly, we probably fight more in the SCA than most medieval soldiers.

] About aluminum lamellar armor: I'm unfamiliar with Mongol armor,
] but Japanese lamellar armor seems to rely partly on movement to mitigate the 
] force of a blow. The Japanese leg and upper arm protection swings freely, 
] and would move under a blow.

Japanese armor was more designed to stop arrows than swords. Before
they became obsolete as soldiers, samurai would ride around shooting 
arrows at each other. Their armor would catch the arrows shot at them,
which you can then shoot back at your enemies. After they became obsolete
as soldiers, samurai they dumped the armor, horse and bow and wandered
around picking sword-fights with each other and terrorizing farmers.
It's this latter period of obsolete samurai most people picture.
( I admit to painting this picture with a wide brush, BTW.)
--
Dennis O'Connor			doconnor@sedona.intel.com
From: Beth.Appleton@f4229.n124.z1.fidonet.org (Beth Appleton)
Sender: FredGate@ocitor.fidonet
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Primitive FireArms
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 11:21:28

 MS> kind of object, which produces a fearful or nervous response.  Many of
 MS> my friends would react to a gun the way they'd 
 MS> react to a bag of noxious
 MS> waste: disgusted and repelled.

 MS> These are decent people, of good will and intent, who don't want guns
 MS> around.  How can we address their needs, as well?
 Simple -- treat period firearms like religion -- stick it off in a 
 corner and don't force anyone to participate.  I suppose that warnings 
 should be issued, so that the jittery *know* what that loud noise is.
     Background:  I'm from the Southwest, from a gun-owning and shooting 
 family, and I think period firearms are absolutely cool.  I'm also in 
 the authenticity side, so I'd be seriously annoyed if someone wanted to 
 use their 1850 blackpowder gun.  Firearms are a real marginal inclusion 
 in the Current Middle Ages, so if we're going to do it at all, we should  do it right.
....
 MS> 2. Similarly, for many gentles, despite the Period evidence, the SCA
 MS> creates not any particular Time and Place, but a fantastical Laurel
 MS> Kingdoms, closely modelled on the more Romantic notions of the Middle
 MS> Ages, plus whatever pieces of authenticity suit their fancy.  To many
 MS> of these people, a period firearm is a complete destruction of their
 MS> Arthurian notions.  (Heck, I have a friend who feels that way about
 MS> Tudor!)
 Tough noogies.  It is period, and so long as we have competitions 
 where the safety of bystanders is fully considered, I would say it's 
 wonderful.  As above though, I don't see this as an area where we 
 should waffle on the authenticity.  Anybody who wants to play guns 
 at an SCA event should be willing to go whole hog and Do It Right.
     Gwenllian Cwmystwyth, Steppes, Ansteorra

 * Origin: Herald's Point * Steppes/Ansteorra * 214-699-0057 (1:124/4229)
From: doconnor@sedona.intel.com (Dennis O'Connor)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Fighting in crown: a thought
Date: 22 Dec 92 13:34:30
Organization: Intel i960(tm) Architecture
	<1992Dec21.175859.10480@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
	<1992Dec22.011342.9994@epas.toronto.edu>
	<1992Dec22.094830.5935@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: potato.intel.com
In-reply-to: pavao@cae.wisc.edu's message of 22 Dec 92 09:48:29 CST


pavao@cae.wisc.edu (Pavao Aaron) writes:
]	 First of all, I said nothing of winning Crown, just fighting there.
] [...] It is the CHALLENGE, the striving toward perfection, which I hope for.
] It is the striving toward perfection (again IMHO) that is the pinnacle
] of chivalry.

I thought honor, service and courtesy to others was. You can be the
world's greatest warrior and still be unchivalrous. You can be the
least skilled of combatants and still be an examplar of chivalry.
Even non-combatants can exemplify chivalry, by our modern definition.

]	 Besides, IF I ever get to Crown and IF I get to, say, the semi-finals,
] I'll either yield or die putting up a good fight. [...]

Let's imagine that the ficticous Sir Magna Invincia has an attitude 
like this one. She enters Crown Tourney and defeats every opponent she
faces, until she arrives in the semi-finals. Since she doesn't really want
to be queen again, she "takes a dive".

Now, imagine how you would feel if you :
	1. Knew this was the case (since deceiving people about
	   one's motives seems to me unchivalrous, everyone would
	   know Sir Magna's intent to not win)
	2. Wanted to be king or queen
	3. Were eliminated from the tourney by Sir Magna

and worse yet:
	4. Someone who happened to be a close friend of the Sir Magna's
	   wound up winning crown.

Wouldn't you feel cheated ?

I've entered every list I ever fought in without expecting to
win : I'm not that good yet. But I was TRYING to win, and
would have been glad to shoulder the responsibilities
attached to victory. Entering any contest without trying
to win seems to me a disservice to your opponents, and
I question how it could be considered chivalrous.

[ There is a separate and more controversial issue involving
  Royal Peers entering Crown Tourney. It involves the idea
  that Royal Peers have a special "duty to the crown" to
  ensure the quality of those who take up the throne they 
  once sat, since they have special 1st hand knowledge of what
  that thrown will require. I mearly mention the issue here. ]


--
Dennis O'Connor			doconnor@sedona.intel.com
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Wanted: Emerald Glen, Drachenwald
From: kgassner@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: 3 Jan 93 01:36:05 CST
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City
NNTP-Posting-Host: vax1.umkc.edu


Is there anybody from Emerald Glenn, Drachenwald visiting the Rialto?
Please contat me in Email.

	Ekkehart von Wartstein
From: SAUNDRSG@qucdn.queensu.ca (Graydon)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Midrealm Crown Tourney customs
Date: 29 Dec 92 07:55:00 GMT
Organization: The Internet

Something that hasn't been brought up - the Midrealm Crown tourney
is the one shining light in the morass of the Middle's ward structure.

The Middle doesn't really have a mid-level fighting award, in the sense
of the Eastrealm Tyger Combatant or the others I've heard mentioned;
the Dragon's Tooth is for (essentially) doing something impressive, not
for being 'notable' in general conduct.

So being invited to Crown serves in lieu of an award to let someone
know that they've been Noticed.  I happen to think that having the
Crown invite you to an important tourney is a pretty good period form
of recognition; admittedly, the *purpose* of the tourney is damned odd...

The folks who've been discussing Crown Tourneys as a the best means
to demonstrate prowess strike me as missing the point, badly.  It has
long been my understanding that the prowess is a side effect of being
(to whatever degree) inspired by your prospective Consort, and being
moved by a desire to serve.  (A polite term for 'aflicted with vision').

I'm actually reasonably content with the Mid's invitational Crown; what
little I've seen of the 'pick the list' process seems about as fair and
straightforward as something based (as I think it should be based) in
custom could be.  The intense conservatism of the Midrealm Chivalry
doesn't seem to be a conected to the form of the Crown Tourney, either.

There is also that it would take a truly *gifted* bad king to put a
dent in the SCA beauracracy of any of the kingdoms or principalities
that I've heard anything about; the 'bad Crown' filter is hardly
necessary in these well regulated times.  :]

Graydon
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: carl@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Alexander of Kiev (mka Carl Alexander))
Subject: Re: Through a looking glass, darkly
Organization: The Rialto
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 06:33:53 GMT

Shay.Wrobel@f302.n374.z1.fidonet.org (Shay Wrobel) writes:
>
> -=> Quoting Alex Tewes to All <=-
>
> AT> From: u883161@postoffice.utas.edu.au (Alex Tewes)
> AT> ....
> AT> I have a question that has been bothering me for a while....
> AT> ....We only know the richness and variety of the SCA in
> AT> the Greater Known World from photos and the tales of travellers.  In
> AT> looking at all the photos which have made their way down to us, I
> AT> notice the complete absence of black faces.... 
 
> AT> Martin de Mont Blanc    (mka Alex Tewes)
>
>Hi there....
> There is no prejudice in the s.c.a....
 
I won't say there are no bigots in the Society -- but given how central
tolerance and open-mindedness are to our ideals of honor and courtesy, I
suspect that bigoted people find the Society rather uncongenial. 
Still, the Society is certainly not a statistical microcosm of America--
there are a disproportionately large number of Jews, for instance,
and of college graduates.  Nevertheless, there are minorities here, and
there always have been:  The principal of the Pelican in the East,
Master El of Two Knives, is Black; the founder of the Great Dark Horde,
Master Yang the Nauseating, is of Philippine ancestry; the seneschal
of Carolingia, Master Kobayashi Yutaka, is of Japanese descent -- you
get the idea.
 
Alexander of Kiev                       Carolingia, East

Carl Alexander                          Harvard Square, Cambridge, Mass.
carl@silver.lcs.mit.edu
alexander@pfc.mit.edu 
 
From: Tim@f4229.n124.z1.fidonet.org (Tim)
Sender: FredGate@ocitor.fidonet
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: On the Nature of Armor ...
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 22:08:09

    Aelfgar von Echternach wrote:

 JM> Here in Austin (I'm new to this barony, and haven't seen the name written
 JM> down so that I could hazard a guess at it's spelling, I 
 JM> think it's Welsh . . .)

    The Barony of Bryn Gwlad.


Tadhg, Obelisk

 * Origin: Herald's Point * Steppes/Ansteorra * 214-699-0057 (1:124/4229)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: info request
From: bakerjd@hirama.hiram.edu
Date: 31 Dec 92 12:39:09 -0500
Organization: Hiram College
Nntp-Posting-User: bakerjd

	I would also like info on how to contact....someone kindly sent
me _what_ SCA was (I'd heard of it, but no one I know personally is
in it) and it sounds really fun!!! I'd like to be a part of it!! :)

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: comptec92024@camins.camosun.bc.ca
Subject: Re: non-fighting rulers
Organization: Camosun College
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 23:51:49 GMT

In article <1993Jan3.170200.19888@news.unomaha.edu>, dburgdor@cwis.unomaha.edu (Darryl Burgdorf) writes:
> 
> Unto (Lord?) Graydon, and the rest of the Rialto, come greetings!
> 
> 
>> Lord Elwyn, pray, why is being royalty the appropriate reward for all
>> excellence?
>> 
>> The poetry that moves this great clanking anachronism has room for a
>> lot of things; permit me to doubt that it has room for 'I am Arthur,
>> King of the Britons, because I was given a set of carpentry tools
>> by the Lady of the Lake and am the second best woodworker the world
>> will ever see.'  (He can't be better than St. Joseph, and Jesus is
>> unfair competition. :)
>> 
>> Royalty are only special because you think they are special.
>> ( I mean, come on, what are the going to do - ride over and burn
>> down your house?)
>> 
>> Graydon
> 
> 
> I must admit, I truly like the carpentry line.  ;)
> 
> I am not at all sure that being royalty is "the appropriate reward" for
> all excellence.  I simply feel that, as (arguably) the highest station to
> which one can rise, it ought to be open to those who excell in *any* area,
> rather than only one particular one.  One can attain a peerage, after all,
> through excellence in any endeavor; why cannot one likewise aspire to the
> throne similarly?
> 
> Royalty are not special only because I "think they are special".  They are
> special because the "mythos" of the SCA tries very hard to *make* them
> special.  I didn't give them regalia or ceremony .... the SCA did.
> 
> 
> 	In service,
> 
> 		Ld Elwyn of Thornbury
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

I tend to agree with Graydon that our Royalty are what we make them. They
really have no way of inforceing their whims on us other then what we are
willing to accept as individuals. It is our desire to make our lives better
that creates the "mythos" in the first place. It was some individual like you
or me who donated his time and skills to produce the regalia. It is only when
we come together as individuals that the SCA has meaning. It is you and me and
every newbee and duke who are the SCA. It is us who make Royalty special
becouse " WE ARE SPECIAL ".

                          Mackenzie.
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Heraldic questions...
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 18:27:55

    Hans Rancke wrote:

 HR> > I define "western culture" to include those areas that were part
 HR> > of the western half of the Roman empire, a position for which I
 HR> > suggest that a substantial case could be made. This means
 HR> > Britain, Gaul, Spain, Italy, and I even look askance at most
 HR> > of Germany....

 HR> I'd very much like to know what culture you define medieval Scandinavia to
 HR> be part of.

 Barbarian fringe, like the Arabs and the Slavs (and quite a few of the
 Germans), with 'western culture' gradually seeping in on the backs of
 Christian missionaries (oops, sorry, used the C-word by mistake...).
 Feudalism is a good indicator; its degree of prevalence indicates the core
 of "medieval" culture.

 HR> All this sounds (to me) very much like you've decided what
 HR> result you want beforehand and then tailored your definitions to fit your
 HR> desires.

 No, my desires are much narrower. "South of the Trent, north of the Loire,
 west of the Rhine."

 HR> Germany and Scandinavia were very much part of western culture.

 Only in the same way that the Mongols were very much a part of Asian
 culture.

 HR> > Non sequitur. To quote Laurel, "We follow the general practices, not
 HR> > the exceptions."

 HR> The impression I've gotten is that you mostly follow English practices,
 HR> which on the evidence appears to be the exception (As opposed to most
 HR> other Western European countries).

 Actually, I mostly prefer Scottish practices, which were modelled on
 French practices. (Unless the "you" in the above sentence was intended to
 refer to the College of Arms in general? In which case it is probably an
 accurate assessment.)

 HR> > The College of Arms (to a lesser extent than I do) focuses on the
 HR> > practices of the "core" of feudal civilization: south of the Trent,
 HR> > north of the Loire, west of the Rhine. You seem to perceive "western
 HR> > Europe" as some sort of homogenized mass, from which any cupful is
 HR> > identical to any other cupful. Not so.

 HR> I should like some evidence to support the contention that the area you
 HR> describe is somehow the core of feudal civilization.

 Marc Bloch, *Feudal Society*", esp. c. XIII "General Survey of Europe".
 Feudalism developed its highest forms feeding on the fragments of the
 Carolingian empire; England was dragged in when the Normans imposed French
 institutions on the Anglo-Saxons. F.L. Ganshoff spends about 40% of his
 "Feudalism", the other standard work on the subject, discussing
 "Carolingian feudalism" (Part II). A thorough reading of both books would
 well repay the time spent, and adequately substantiate my position.

    Tadhg, Obelisk


 * Origin: Herald's Point * Steppes/Ansteorra * 214-699-0057 (1:124/4229)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: PAULB@saturn.uark.EDU ("Paul A. Byers")
Subject: Am I getting though?
Organization: University of Arkansas
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 14:50:44 GMT

if any one gets this please respond.

Pavel
Calontir
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: Period Calendar Wanted
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 16:29:34 GMT

In article <725767220.AA00000@blkcat.UUCP> Dave.Aronson@p11.f120.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Dave Aronson) writes:
>jww@evolving.com (John W. Woolley) writeth:
>
> JWW> Remember that, no matter the time of year, there are twelve equal hours
> JWW> of day and twelve of night; so that in winter day hours are much shorter
> JWW> than night hours.
>
>Three questions.
>
>1. Are you pulling our legs?  If no, proceed to 2....

No--he's not pulling anyone's leg.

>2. This implies that sunrise and sunset are at x:00 AM and x:00 PM respectively.
> What is x?  I would guess 6 since it's halfway.  Yes?

'1', actually.  Dawn begins the first hour of the day.  Really quit
simple....

>3. Does anyone out there know of any self-adjusting timepieces that would take
>this stretching and shrinking of hours into account?

Yup.  A sundial.  It was the development of mechanical clocks that
changed things--eventually--to an all-hours-are-equal system.
Remember that most of history is before mechanical clocks.

	--Hal

        Hal Ravn, Province of the Mists, West Kingdom
        Wilson H. Heydt, Jr.,  Albany, CA 94706,  510/524-8321 (home)
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |            You!
510-823-5447                 |    Out of the Gene Pool!
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: holsten@insect.berkeley.EDU (Donna Holsten)
Subject: RE: Who's game are you playing?
Reply-To: holsten@insect.berkeley.edu
Organization: The Internet
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 21:09:01 GMT

Greetings-

I am a newcomer to the Rialto, although not to the SCA, and I have
been following the discussions on several topics, specifically:  the purpose
of the CoA, the age at which one becomes "adult", how important it is to be
"authentic" or "in period", fighters who play only to hurt others, etc.

It seems to me that the answer to all of these questions is:  Who's game are
you playing?  Everyone who comes to the SCA does so for a different reason,
and plays by different rules.  Some rules (e.g., submitting a device and
name to the CoA) are followed by the majority of people, but this does not
necessarily make them absolute.  If someone does not wish to submit to the
CoA, so be it.  If someone doesn't wish to camp with me because I am only 21
(have a B.A., am married, and I do *not* consider myself a child), so be it.
If someone values comfort over authenticity, so be it.

One of the reasons that I joined the SCA was that I saw a higher quality of
person than I did in the mundane world.  I saw people who had consideration,
kindness, and courtesy.  I have learned to extend that same courtesy to those
who do not share my views.  I am willing to accept that not everyone is
playing my game, and would hope that others would accept it as well.  I will
invite others to share my set of rules, but will *never* insist.  When I
find that my rules differ greatly from those of the majority of other
people, I either change my rules, or change the people with whom I play.

I recently (within the past year) moved out of a small, closely-knit shire
in Caid to the Principality of the Mists, West.  The game is played a
lot differently here, and I seriously considered leaving the SCA entirely.
Reading through all of the opinions expressed here on the Rialto, I
realized that there *are* people who share my set of rules, who are in the
SCA for the same reasons I am.  I realized that, although it might take some
work on my part, I *will* find my niche here in the West.  I would like to
encourage all those pour lost souls like myself to try one more time; people
change, and so do entire groups, and if you are dissatisfied with the SCA
today, either change your rules, your group of friends, or wait a year or
so.

I would like to thank all of the good gentles on the Rialto who have
contributed to my decision to give it another shot.

Joanna Melissa Ronsivalle               Donna Holsten
Or, in pale two bottlenosed             holsten@insect.berkeley.edu
dolphins, naiant, sable
Joanna Melissa Ronsivalle               Donna Holsten
Or, in pale two bottlenosed             holsten@insect.berkeley.edu
dolphins, naint, sable
From: Joe.Bethancourt@f4229.n124.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bethancourt)
Sender: FredGate@ocitor.fidonet
From: nusbache@epas.utoronto.ca (Aryk Nusbacher)
Subject: Re: Fighting for Crown....A Question.
Organization: University of Toronto - Office of the Provost
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 16:42:16 GMT

In article <01GSNO8HF1548Y5K5M@gallua.bitnet> PAMCCOY@gallua.gallaudet.EDU ("Pat McCoy a.k.a. Bones") writes:

>If one is physically unable to fight, does that mean
>that the gentle could never become royalty?


Get a tough girlfriend.

Aryk