From: ds4p+@andrew.cmu.edu (David Schroeder)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: SCA 2500 C.E.
Date: 8 Sep 92 03:07:38 GMT
Organization: Doctoral student, Industrial Administration, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Greetings good gentles --

Arval (symbols = '>' to my '> >' ) replies to my initial question:

> > I wonder -- how far does the analogy of 
> > 
> >          Modern-football <==> Medieval-tourneys
>  
> Not very far, I think.  
>  
> Modern football is an entertainment for the masses; I know no evidence that
> the medieval tournament as practiced in France, England, and the Lowlands,
> attracted any audience from outside the nobility.

I find this assertion hard to believe -- ONLY the nobles watched?
What about my cherished illusions of peasant lads peeking through
knotholes in fences blazoning the knights' shields to each other...
Seriously -- if Pennsic is supposed to be a Grand Tourney -- did
they really have _thousands_ of nobles show up for period tourneys?
What about all the assorted servants and retainers -- didn't they
attend (or perhaps they just didn't get the skyboxes) ?  Help me
out here folks -- these tournaments must have been MAGNETS for
people for miles around.  How did they keep the non-noble folk out?

> Modern football players are professionals, paid by wealthy owners to earn
> them money.  In the medieval tournament, the weathy patrons took part in
> the tournament, they didn't just sponsor it.  Indeed, by the late 14th
> century, participation in the tournament was restricted to knights, and
> eventually to knights descended from knights.  (On the other hand, there
> were professionals on the tourney circuit, and it was a matter of prestige
> (though not profit) for a patron to support the best tourneyers.)

Granted.  But weren't there more noble males around than tourney fighters?
Did _all_ the noble males fight, at least during part of their careers?
(By the way -- did clumsy medieval fighters just DIE early, or could they
NOT be tourney fighters and still be well thought of?  What about the
older nobles, too?)

> The tournament was more intimately a part of noble culture, rather than
> simply an entertainment.  

Clearly, some modern "nobles" take their football more seriously than
others.  The degree to which "sports in general and football in particular"
are intimately a part of modern corporate culture should not be under-
estimated.  (Spoken as one who lived near Pittsburgh during their four
Super Bowl championships.)

>                           In some manuals of chivalry, tournament combat
> was considered one of the three venues for a knight to display his prowess
> (after the Crusade and warfare).  A display of skill on the tourney field
> could lead to recognition, position, rank, and power; when was the last
> time you heard of a retired linebacker becoming CEO of Xerox?

Sec'y of HUD Jack Kemp -- former quarterback of the Buffalo Bills,
for example -- and a host of collegiate level football players
permeating the higher ranks of sales and management teams in
the corporate world.  The late Sam Walton of Wal-Mart was a
hotshot football player, for instance.

> Perhaps a more apt analogy for modern football is the Roman Circus.

Hmmm.... that leads to interesting speculation on urbanization versus
forms of entertainment.

Well, friends, back to rocking little Elizabeth Kori...

Take care -- Bertram

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Bertram of Bearington                                      Dave Schroeder
Debatable Lands/AEthelmearc/East               Carnegie Mellon University
INTERNET: ds4p@andrew.cmu.edu                         412/731-3230 (Home)
+------------------------ PREME * Press On * PREME ---------------------+
      "He indulged in every excess, yes in each licentious whim..."